W8. Reliability of Wikipedia, Reliable sources - Gyongmin Moon, 문경민
1. Summary
Wikipedia doesn't regard itself as a reliable source of information, since everyone can edit whenever they want, and even though Wikipedia's speed of restoring the damaged articles is fast, not every error can be fixed every single second. But because Wikipedias's final vision is to share all the information in the world with every single person on the Earth, Wikipedia always tries to contain correct information. To maintain this status, Wikipedia suggests the Wikipedians to always add a citation of what they would write. Without a citation, the sentence might be deemed as personal research. If an article doesn't have enough citations, it can be deleted after a discussion. But even with the citation, not every information is counted as reliable ones. The citations of unreliable sources such as personal blogs, personally published books, other wikis, and unprofessional club's homepages. Also, the citation requires verifiability, which means everyone who wants to see the reference should be able to check it whenever they eager to. This means one can not use a professional book in their bookshelf as a citation in Wikipedia no matter how reliable the source is.
2. Learned
What was interesting to me was that the scholars would use Wikipedia as the jump-off section of their research. Because I also sometimes use Namuwiki to get the idea of my advertisement project. The Wikis are made by many people, which means they have a broad range of information on a single topic. Even though there might be a chance of it being false information, some of them really do help to get a brilliant perspective of the same subject.
3. Discussion
Do you think if a information is so obvious and almost every person would know it for sure, is it okay to not add a citation for it, or not?
Wikipedia doesn't regard itself as a reliable source of information, since everyone can edit whenever they want, and even though Wikipedia's speed of restoring the damaged articles is fast, not every error can be fixed every single second. But because Wikipedias's final vision is to share all the information in the world with every single person on the Earth, Wikipedia always tries to contain correct information. To maintain this status, Wikipedia suggests the Wikipedians to always add a citation of what they would write. Without a citation, the sentence might be deemed as personal research. If an article doesn't have enough citations, it can be deleted after a discussion. But even with the citation, not every information is counted as reliable ones. The citations of unreliable sources such as personal blogs, personally published books, other wikis, and unprofessional club's homepages. Also, the citation requires verifiability, which means everyone who wants to see the reference should be able to check it whenever they eager to. This means one can not use a professional book in their bookshelf as a citation in Wikipedia no matter how reliable the source is.
2. Learned
What was interesting to me was that the scholars would use Wikipedia as the jump-off section of their research. Because I also sometimes use Namuwiki to get the idea of my advertisement project. The Wikis are made by many people, which means they have a broad range of information on a single topic. Even though there might be a chance of it being false information, some of them really do help to get a brilliant perspective of the same subject.
3. Discussion
Do you think if a information is so obvious and almost every person would know it for sure, is it okay to not add a citation for it, or not?
Comments
Post a Comment