Blogging through Wikipedia (2020)

W-Extra. “Wikipedia I met for one semester.” / Kim Seon Woo   During the last semester, I met Professor Wikipedia while attending Professor Peter's major. As I edited it, it was both difficult and difficult. However, in the process of sharing information and discussing with many people, I was able to further develop my knowledge. We had a hard time experiencing the corona virus, but once again, I think humanity is making progress. If we overcome this situation wisely, we can face a slightly better future. What was Wikipedia for you? Let's discuss it last.

W-Extra. “For quality control of Wiki.” / Kim Seon Woo Summary  Wikipedia's editing model and wiki approach support editing changes and audacity. However, on some Wikipedias, it has been shown that some new wrong edits have a point of precedence over new good ones. As the entire edits to the article get closer to N, the quality improves (with unspecified features) from that point on, quality tends to level or degrade with further editing. Therefore, when the article reaches this quality level, further editing should be investigated further. This is called article quality defense. Interesting Point.  I think Wikipedia needs a more sophisticated system in order to provide better quality articles. A group advisory group that can confirm the accuracy of knowledge, such as a scholarship group. Discussion.  How can I improve the quality of Wikipedia?

W-Extra. “CC limitations.” / Kim Seon Woo Summary Creative Commons (CC) is a non-profit organization founded in 2001 with the purpose of partially sharing copyrights. The agency created the Creative Commons License (CCL), a copyright license on December 16, 2002. A typical project under the Creative Commons License (CCL) is Wikipedia. Wikipedia is licensed under a dual license of Creative Commons (CCL) and GNU Free Documentation (GFDL). Interesting Point.   I am very supportive of CC. However, there are limits to this. The original copyright holder initially promised partial sharing, but after that you may want to limit copyright to make money. However, there seems to be no policy. Discussion.   How can I overcome the limitations of CC?

W-Extra. “For a small number of opinions to be respected in Wiki.” / Kim Seon Woo Summary Voting is one of the best ways to quantify opinions in large groups. Online communities with a common goal are constantly making decisions. In a small group of similarly thought individuals, consensus decisions can often be found in discussion. VotingIsEvil from such a group. However, as the group grows, it becomes CommunityMayNotScale. Each member of the group is likely not to agree with one of the existing members. According to MetcalfesLaw, the probability of conflict between two individuals increases geometrically. According to ReedsLaw, the likelihood of collisions between two subgroups increases exponentially. If an individual with objections is Community Exiled, the group can yield to GroupThink. If not excluded, you can delay the settlement decision indefinitely. Interesting Point.  I am well aware that voting majority in democracy is not a universal solution. This is because v...

W-Extra. “To improve online culture.” / Kim Seon Woo Summary Fortunately, Wikipedia Ace Class Shadow provided helpful advice, recognizing that there was no perfect solution. Use the template to indicate that the discussion page is archived, or "take fair action to get closer to action and respect their common sense judgment. To this day there was once a closure that seemed completely inaccurate with this method."  In this debate, I'm not sure if these guidelines could convince the minority to support the legitimacy of the “use as needed” policy as a consistent suffix. Therefore, no punishment was offered to the parties for “cases of previous policy violations” beyond accusations of individual attacks and “some uncertainty about how to determine whether or not there is consensus in a particular case”. This is the ambiguity and challenge of consensus practice, and a source of temptation to use some voting systems. Interesting Point.  I am aware of the occasional v...

W-Extra. “The world information repository should be the world public sphere.” / Kim Seon Woo Summary HG Wells thought that the “World Encyclopedia” should be more than an information store and a “coordination and coordination agency”. I raised this debate early to explain Wikipedia's two opposing philosophies: inclusionism and deletionism. This issue and the proliferation of articles have caused much more minor debate, though not Belly Coz. If every TV show episode has its own article, how do you name these articles so that they don't conflict with other articles? This discussion demonstrates the misunderstanding of consensus and the difficulty of these decision-making practices in the public community. Interesting Point.  As mentioned in the summary, I think Wikipedia should act as a'public field' rather than just a repository. Discussing in a place where information is gathered is because you can exchange high-quality opinions as if you were talking in a libr...

W-Extra. “With the CC, the era of true information freedom opens.” / Kim Seon Woo Summary Creative Commons (CC) is a non-profit organization founded in 2001 with the purpose of partially sharing copyrights. The agency created the Creative Commons License (CCL), a copyright license on December 16, 2002. A typical project under the Creative Commons License (CCL) is Wikipedia. Wikipedia is licensed under a dual license of Creative Commons (CCL) and GNU Free Documentation (GFDL). Interesting Point. I actively support the CC movement. Of course, personal copyright is very important, but I think that the value of information on the Internet must be allowed to some degree in order to shine more. So I hope that this culture will be expanded. Discussion.  However, CC culture in Korea is unfamiliar. How do you popularize it?

W-Extra. “Enemy of students at Hanyang University: Wikipedia” / Kim Seon Woo Summary  In Western culture, Wikipedia has increased online encyclopedia projects with more people using it for more information. The openness of many parody Wikipedias, where individuals damage or modify articles in a non-constructive way. Nevertheless, others use Wikipedia as a reference or feature individuals who positively compare intelligence with Wikipedia. In some cases, Wikipedia is not used as an encyclopedia at all, but instead as a character trait or game. Wikipedia has also become culturally important, as many people see their Wikipedia items as a status symbol. Interesting Point.  It sounds ridiculous, but Wikipedia is described as hell among students of the Department of Information and Social Sciences at Hanyang University. Perhaps it was because Professor Peter's major was boring with Wikipedia. We always respond to the idea that the challenge is difficult. "It's better tha...

W-Extra. “What are the alternatives to getting accurate information?” / Kim Seon Woo Summary According to the US research team, about 60% of company-related content among documents registered in English-language Wikipedia has been found to be misleading. The research team's professor estimates that this is because certain companies are putting favorable content on the company in Wikipedia to make the image positive. Interesting Point.   It was a rather shocking news for me, who usually trusted Wikipedia and referenced the material. The findings, about 60% of which is wrong, indicate a sense of crisis about what we are doing on this task. Discussion.   How can I make Wikipedia reliable?

W-Extra. “The Future of Media: Wikipedia.” / Kim Seon Woo Summary  Wikipedia is owned and supported by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization that holds free works, has no commercial advertising, and is primarily funded through donations. As of 2020, if you combine more than 300 language versions, including over 6 million English versions and 501,479 Korean versions, more than 40 million articles will be recorded, and it will grow steadily. Wikipedia is copyrighted under the Creative Commons License (CCL) and the GNU Free Documentation (GFDL) dual license. Both licenses are for free content, and if certain requirements are met, they are not restricted by use. Interesting Point.  I thought Wikipedia was an alternative to commercialized and industrialized mass media. Despite the absence of advertisements and a'non-profit foundation' run through donations, Wikipedia has a tremendous influence worldwide. This is a new media trend. Discussion.  How can...

W-Extra. “The result of cutting-edge technology: Wikipedia.” / Kim Seon Woo Summary  The first impulse to answer the question of Wikipedia's success is to focus on technology. Obviously, as can be seen from my history, technology has played an important role in encouraging the vision of the universal encyclopedia. In addition, beyond inspiration, networking skills and related collaborative technologies can support openness and accessibility, facilitating socialization of officers and newcomers. On the wiki, contributors can communicate asynchronously and contribute gradually. You can modularize your work.  You can easily reverse your changes. Further adjustments to accessible documents, discussion pages, templates and automated tools However, technology is important but insufficient. Despite the wiki pixie dust, many projects fail. This is the question "Why is something like Wikipedia possible?" It leads to the question "How can I understand Wikipedia's col...

W-Extra. “Can I be neutral?” / Kim Seon Woo Summary  However, as "neutral" is understood not as a description of the encyclopedia, but as a contributor's eagerness and intentional position, one must recognize the universal attitude, openness, and good faith ideals from a similar perspective. For example, within the public content community, there are inherent tensions (eg “unstructured tyranny”) and practical difficulties (eg Wikipedia office action). Likewise, it would be wrong if Wikipedia should focus on goodwill (assuming it's doing its best for others, working for patience, citizens, and humor), suggesting that it is a harmonious community of benevolent saints. Interesting Point.  During everyday life or during school class discussions, I always face'people who take a neutral position'. They often take a'neutral position', claiming that they are not biased to either the left or the right, to conservatives or progress. Wikipedia is the same...

W-Extra. “What are the criteria for credibility in references?” / Kim Seon Woo Summary References can facilitate and shape the flow of social anxiety. As you can see from Morton's Webster's Third history, many of the debates related to publishing were about something other than the strengths of a particular dictionary. I generalize the debate by looking briefly at the past about the question of how references are related to conservative and progressive tensions, and how Wikipedia in the past will get entangled in similar debates. Interesting Point.  In the writings I encounter as I go around the Internet space,'Reliability in References' has always been a question. Where can I get the reliability of the reference? Is there a clear standard of reliability for references? Isn't it different in each country and institution in the world? Who manages the standards for this? Discussion.  What are the reliability standards for the literature we refer to as we d...

W-Extra. “To expand online democracy?” / Kim Seon Woo Summary The way we collaborate with Wikipedia is at the heart of heated discussions. Just as reference works can inspire passionate devotion to contributors, they can also inspire passionate imbalances. In 2004, Michael Gorman, former chairman of the American Library Association, wrote opposition to criticize Google and its book-scanning project. He was surprised by the negative online response to his work, but after a couple of years he doubled the attack. In 2007, we focused on blogs and wiki encyclopedias to explain the impact of "digital tsunami" on learning. In a blog essay titled "Jabberwiki", Gorman praised Sanger's abandonment of Wikipedia to more professional, friendly citizens and criticized those who continue to contribute or use Wikipedia. Interesting Point.  We know that Wikipedia's core power is in discussion. The corona virus crisis has activated the face-to-face era. At this time, ...

W-Extra. “What should a malicious interferer do?” / Kim Seon Woo Summary  Goodwill cooperation: Wikipedia's culture covers 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, practice, and theoretical pioneers, and culture, including consensus and collaboration practices. Interesting Point.  Wikipedia operates on the basis of good faith cooperation. By the way, as you roam the Internet, you often see malicious jammers. Those who spread malicious comments, slanderous posts, and false information. Discussion.  How can we punish them? If punishment is difficult, how can you edify their actions?

What do you think are going to be important communication technology? Recent years have seen a major shift as Internet becomes mobile- we can use it "on the go." through laptops, smartphones and tablets. Soon we may able to access Internet through googles other ways. I think 5G is an important communication technology in the future. Fifth-generation communication technology is a future technology that connects mobile devices and networks at high speeds. 5G technology with fully connected sensors and devices will change the economy and business policy. Furthermore, it will serve as a basic platform for the entire ecosystem that breaks down geographical and cultural boundaries. 5G aims to receive content as soon as it is sent. In the future, intelligent connections and sensors will enable people to recognize and interact with objects around them or even thousands of kilometers away. If data is continuously collected and analyzed using sensors, devices can act on behalf o...

Wikipedia is not the first project which aims to collect and organize the "sum total of human knowledge" but it is the most efficient of all attempts to do so. Why? Wikipedia can get information from all fields of knowledge. Regardless of the subject, there is information about all kinds of knowledge and there is no need for experts in each field of knowledge. Wikipedia is therefore a collection of "the sum of human knowledge." Other websites do not have a "discussion"  where only experts can answer and freely express their opinions. Wikipedia is open to everyone, whether they are students, office workers, or professionals, if they have knowledge in the field.  In this regard, Wikipedia seems to be able to develop into a website that gathers information from all fields of knowledge. In fact, there are few such pages except Wikipedia. Instead, Wikipedia has five strict rules: "WikiPedia is an encyclopedia, Wikipedia looks from a neutral perspe...

Why do people contribute to Wikipedia? Wikipedia attracts volunteers (editor), editing them. What Fey don't get them. So, Why do people to contribute to Wikipedia? First, 69 percent of people like to share their knowledge. In addition, 64 percent of people, failure or incorrect information wants to fix it. 50 % of people wanted to know about a subject not handled right. Also wanted to learn new skills, and to spread the knowledge they wanted to expand. There is a person who is able to edit Wikipedia's debate and wanted to see whether friends or family wanted to participate in or college and taking part in the Wikipedia.There was also because through editing at school or work reasons. The last reason is why I am to participate in the Wikipedia editing.  Only 2 percent of people edit because of school assignments or jobs. But now I'm having fun sharing my knowledge with Wikipedia and I've included in 69%

 Who do you think edits Wikipedia? The young, the old,female, male, Americans, Koreans?  I think men in their 30s have the most editors. And in actuality,   According to the worldwide Wikipedia Editors Survey 2011 of all the Wikipedias, 91% of editors are male. However, the number of women editors is on the rise.   On January 30, 2011, an article in the New York Times quoted the Wikimedia Foundation's announcement and reported that less than 13 percent of the Wikipedia contributors were women. So why does this result? The "Discussion" page, where discussions are made about the contents of the document, is not attractive to women because of its highly controversial nature, but rather can give them "fear as soon as they see it." Women also have equal knowledge of men and can defend their point of view, but" disputes, arguments, and fierce defense are still often considered masculine in American society, and women's remarks in this tone can lead to negat...

 Do you think Wikipedia is right to reject censorship? I think Wikipedia needs censorship. In particular, Wikipedia is a collective intelligence page that everyone can edit, so there may be misinformation or someone maliciously interferes with. There are small numbers of trolls and other disruptive editors who are seeking to edit our Wikipedia. Wikipedia has tens of thousands of volunteers (editors) but certainly has trolls. In order to manage this, Wikipedia administrators are also necessary and there is a reality.Censorship is necessary because in Internet culture, Internet trolls deliberately post controversial, inflammatory, wild or off-topic, or offensive or offensive content on the public Internet, causing people's emotional reactions and lowering the productivity of the gathering.  The fact that Wikipedia is vulnerable to mischief or editing to distort information also causes it to lose accuracy and credibility. Korean Wikipedia on February 28, 2017 as an example i...