Week14-reading watching blog-QU HONGYU 굴홍우

Summary:

Wikipedia's "Did you know" (DYK) project is a section that showcases newly created or greatly expanded articles, located on the main Wikipedia page. DYK selects articles through an informal review process and presents some interesting facts (called "hooks").

DYK shows readers the continuous improvement and expansion of Wikipedia content by showcasing newly created or substantially expanded articles. This not only keeps readers informed of the dynamic changes in Wikipedia, but also encourages editors to keep contributing new content.

DYK helps readers realize the wide range of topics covered by Wikipedia, from history and science to culture, technology and more, by showcasing articles from different fields.

DYK provides exposure to some of the more obscure or niche topics that may not be shown in other sections. DYK encourages editors to continue to participate in Wikipedia editing by sending them notifications on user discussion pages that recognize their contributions.

DYK attracts new editors by presenting interesting facts, stimulating readers' interest and encouraging them to participate in editing or creating new articles.

DYK is not an ordinary trivia section, nor is it an advertising or promotional platform. Articles must meet certain criteria, such as newly created, substantially expanded, or promoted to "quality articles," and must comply with Wikipedia's content policies, such as verifiability, no copyright infringement, and compliance with the Living Biographies Policy.


Interesting point:

DYK's nomination process has a unique "principle of reciprocity" : If you have nominated five or more articles, you must review one other person's nomination for each subsequent nominated article. This mechanism is designed to promote cooperation and mutual assistance among editors. In this way, editors not only contribute their own content, but also participate in the review of other content, creating a virtuous circle.


Discussion:

Do you think DYK's "Reciprocity Principle" has been effective in promoting collaboration among editors? Are there any potential challenges or problems with this mechanism?


Comments

  1. CHAEBINJune 5, 2025 at 12:48 AM

    I also read about DYK this week, and I agree that it helps promote collaboration among editors. However, the reciprocity principle doesn't always lead to positive outcomes. Some editors may leave only superficial reviews or exchange reviews only with people they already know. This can lower the quality of content and discourage new editors from participating. For the reciprocity principle to work effectively, a diverse group of editors needs to contribute with fairness and a spirit of voluntary collaboration. To support this, a reward system could be introduced. What other methods do you think could help encourage this kind of participation?

    ReplyDelete
  2. 권현지June 5, 2025 at 5:42 PM

    I think the principle of reciprocity was effective in promoting collaboration among editors. This is because they can complement each other's content by actively participating in the review of not only their own content but also content created by others. Through this principle, collaboration between editors increases and contributes to improving the quality of articles.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Introduction to the blog

This blog is a digital forum where students from Collective Intelligence in Practice: Understanding Wikipedia at the Hanyang University in Korea (2025) will discuss their weekly readings and activities. Each week you are expected to post a blog post on our blog and make a comment on another student's post. You can do so on one of the following three topics: a) You can blog about the readings for the next week. As you are expected to do the assigned readings FOR the lectures they are assigned to, you are expected to post your blog and comments BEFORE that lecture. An ideal commentary should be about half a page in length (~200 words), divided into three clearly labeled sections in which you: 1) summarize in your own words of materials you read; 2) mention any new, interesting, or unusual items learned; 3) identify at least one question, concern, or discussion angle that is either problematic in some respect or could have been elaborated more. This question is likely to be incor...
Read more

Week 1. My Recent Wikipedia Edits - Jeong seolah (정설아)

I made several edits to the Wikipedia page for 'Daegu'.  Daegu, located in the southeastern part of South Korea, is the third-largest urban area in the country, following Seoul and Busan. With a population exceeding 2.3 million, it is the fourth-largest metropolitan city in South Korea and the second-largest in the Yeongnam region after Busan. Often referred to together with the surrounding North Gyeongsang Province as Daegu-Gyeongbuk, this region is home to over 5 million residents. Known for its rich history and vibrant economy, Daegu stands as a key player in South Korea's cultural and industrial landscape. Below is a summary of the changes I contributed. 1) Summarize and link Sights Section:  - Improved clarity by changing “mountains keep many traditional temples” to “the mountains keep many traditional temples.” Mosque Controversy Section:  - Simplified a sentence by removing “and of the authorities.” Festivals Section:  - Made phrasing smoother by changing “tho...
Read more

Week4 - Review about the readings for the next week. - Jo HyeonSeong (조현성)

 1. Summarize in my own words of materials. The book is primarily about the openness of Wikipedia. Openness means that anyone can participate in the creation and editing of articles without any qualifications. Openness can be a double-edged sword. While it means that you can edit without having expert knowledge of a topic, it also means that you can participate even if you have expert knowledge. For experts, articles written by non-experts can come across as inaccurate knowledge, which can anger experts. This anger can also be a catalyst for Wikipedia to continue to improve. However, articles edited only by non-experts can cause misunderstandings and convey incorrect information, so openness can be considered a double-edged sword. In fact, it sometimes causes some conflict, such as Wales' negative stance. Openness also means freedom from copyright, which means anyone can take it and use it anywhere. That is why the knowledge of non-experts can have greater impact. That is why appro...
Read more