W6-1. Encyclopedic Anxiety / ji eun Bang

Encyclopedic Anxiety

Wikipedia has caused social unrest. Wikipedia is a place where discussions are activated because anyone can edit and collaborate. Much as reference works might inspire passionate dedication in their contributors, they also, seemingly, can inspire passionate disparagement.  

Wikipedia can also be authoritative. There are elements to this in the arguments about Wikipedia, particularly over the way it is produced. Describing how knowledge is constituted can be difficult, but one can identify three ways for how we might think of knowledge production throughout history. First, you should know that an encyclopedia with little contact with people is useless. Second, the production of reference work eventually surpassed everyone's ability. Finally, there is Wikipedia and other open content. In earlier chapters I explore how this community and its culture facilitate the production of an encyclopedia


Reference works can prompt and embody currents of social unease.We should not dramatize our views or religious opinions in Wikipedia (e.g. alt-left or alt-right)I first knew that reference could destabilize Wikipedia. Reference literature will always have to be considered objectively and critically, recognizing that too subjective opinions or views may be included in accordance with the direction of the researcher's research.


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

W7. Good Faith Collaboration / Kim Seon Woo

Summary   Wikipedia's culture includes the topics of Wikipedia and the Wikipedia community, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. The 2010 book. This book was first published on August 27, 2010 through MIT Press and has a preface to Lawrence Lessig.   This book is an ethnographic study of Wikipedia's history, practical and theoretical pioneers, and culture, including consensus and collaboration practices. This book is described as a pioneering ethnographic study of Wikipedia culture. Reagle's main paper was summed up with the claim that "Wikipedia's success may be less technical than the results of Wikipedia's community and their cultural norms." Interesting Point It is interesting to discuss Wikipedia's fundamental principle of operation, 'cooperation'. Wikipedia, which can be seen as an integral part of modern technology, would not be possible without cooperation. Discussion Does Wikipedia only have cooperation? How should conflict ...
Read more