W1. Wiki:Reliable sources / Dayoung Ryu, 류다영




When people are discussing, disputing and make better something, we usually say it is collective intelligence. However, before we think a thing is ‘collective intelligence’, we need to know some conditions must be met.

As I said last post (Why am I studying this class?), I think team project is based on collective intelligence. My team searched lots of information on the internet to develop the ideas of project and created something. Let’s think about ‘searching’. 
When me and my team searched something, we used only major news, such as BBC, KBS, MBC, Hangyeorea, medical journals, and so on. If anyone sends a link of unreliable information, we say: “so, can we say it comes from this website to our professor?” We tried to revalidate that source and information.

With this example, I can see an important condition of collective intelligence, which is ‘reliable’. According to the Wikipedia site, Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published sources, making sure that all majority and significant minority views that have appeared in those sources are covered. Wikipedia strongly avoids questionable sources with a poor reputation. It seems like I and my team asked about sourced ourselves that ‘the Professor test – does the professor allow a source to use for us?’.

I realized one more thing. There is no condition about source reliable in Korean Wiki. On the website of Namuwiki, they notice that they pass or do not pass an information after ‘discuss.’ This means people who join the discussion could be an expert, but could be an ordinary student, because Namuwiki has millions of anonymous members. Do we believe they had a 'the Professor test' at least before they fixed and corrected any information?

 How could we rely on it? I wonder if there is a student has a nice idea to improve NamuWiki. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

WK 5.2 The Benevolent Dictator - Hanane Ben Abdeslam

In the reading it starts with the example of a “Neo-Nazi” dictator, it didn’t say when it exactly happened but I think it was during World War I and II. This dictator just did what he wanted to do, locking articles down, ban people, and protecting their own reputation and integrity. Actually, for someone to have that much power by a community founder is not unique to Wikipedia. Such leaders are often found in a project around, which a community develops, or otherwise emerge from a leaderless context by way of merit. However, Wikipedia is not an anarchy, democracy, nor a monarchy. Because of the voluntary and meritocratic character of open content communities it is not surprising that leaders are expected to lead by example as their very leadership is founded upon exemplary behavior. This means that leadership emerges through action rather than appointment. The prominent leader of an open content community is sometimes characterizing as a benevolent dictator. This is a variation on a t...
Read more

W2. What is Wikipedia - Seungju Lee

Summary Wikipedia is a multilingual online encyclopedia as an collaboration project. It isn't made by one people. Anyone can write and share information. It is maintained by non profit organizations. It is the largest and most popular  general reference work on the World Wide Web, and is one of the 20 most popular websites. Diverse information can be found in encyclopedia. Interesting point Wikipedia is made by group. All people in group can share their own information. Not only expert, but also anyone who have interest in topic, they can participate in make dictionary. I had a negative opinion about this in past, because this can affect on accuracy of information. But, after I realized that  this is "collaboration" project, many people can give a feedback to writers who post wrong information. So I could change my mind that that kind of feedback make good circulation on advance of wikipedia. And also it is collaboration project,  so I think variety of informat...
Read more

W2. What is Wikipedia? / Juhee Cha

After reading http://reagle.org/joseph/2010/gfc/foreward.html http://reagle.org/joseph/2010/gfc/preface-web.html http://reagle.org/joseph/2010/gfc/preface.html *Summary Wikipedia is a collaborative community that can freely and voluntarily make changes to the world. empower people to a wide The people who share knowledge here are not for the sake of money but for the people who love knowledge sharing itself. The data that you normally seek for knowledge is limited. These materials are difficult to produce and logically technical. But Wikipedia makes those processes simple. Wikipedia goes through the process of discussing drafts, sending comments, pointing out what is missing, and presenting ideas. *Interesting Point There was also definitely a negative perception of the Internet dictionary before taking the class. The biggest reason for this was that the public, not the 'experts', could modify it. But rather, after learning about Wikipedia's principles, I changed m...
Read more