Blogging through Wikipedia (2020)

Most of the articles in Wikipedia are associated in a category or two. Due to the categorization, people can easily check and access to other related articles. By organizing the articles this way, Wikipedia can maintain quality lists of articles without any chaotic mess. Sometimes, the categories closely related to each other get grouped into one, and turns into Wikiproject. We all know Wikipedian article is assessed by other Wikipedians and eventually gets its grade from stub to featured, and by the importance of it. But an article also can be assessed in its Wikiproject once more, both its quality of content and its importance. It was really hard for me to categorize articles that I started by myself. Because there might be a category that I might be trying to assign my article into, but I just haven't typed the correct word for it. For example, I was trying to assign my article of  데이비드_A._와일리  into 'living people' category in Korean Wikipedia, but I couldn't find ...

Although Wikipedia introduces itself to be an open and free content that anyone can edit, it doesn't mean that it can be formed whatever the editors like it to be. It has a certain rule for how an article should look like to get a high classification of the article's quality on assessments. But, even though those rules are clearly written and suggested to all the Wikipedians, it is hard to match up all the points that Wikipedia requests to an article. Consequently, a relatively high number of articles are classified as stubs or start-level, which is the first and the second-lowest article quality rank in Wikipedia. But this doesn't mean that achieving the higher level is impossible. After all, Wikipedia is a place where you work with everyone else in the world. Help others on what you are good at, and receive help from others on what they are good at. By keeping this up, there are no articles bad enough to remain at the bottom level forever. Before this week, I thought th...

When simply put, Creative Commons is an NPO that serves the role of assigning licenses to works that can be freely used without any extra permission. Many Wikis' articles are also deployed via variation of Creative Commons Licences including Wikipedia and even the Namuwiki of South Korea. Because it enables others to relatively-freely use the published work for their own purpose, it is sometimes deemed as if it is against copyright. But, this is rather a false opinion because Creative Commons License also depends on the work's copyright. The purpose of the Creative Commons License is to make the greater good by sharing ideas and format of works created by a diverse pool of people. So, it will be much easier to understand it by getting close to the term called copyleft. As I mentioned in my previous posting, I'm writing a Wikipedian article about open content. The open content is strongly related to Creative Commons License so I also edited some of CCL related articles i...

What did I learn while editing Wikipedia? How is this assignment different from more traditional student assignments? Is it more fun? This is the first time that I contributed to Wikipedia, or any other encyclopedic platform. Before this semester, I've only experienced Namuwiki and Naver encyclopedia to get ideas for my advertising planning document. First, I thought that Wikipedia requires some kind of special and professional ability such as coding, but Wikipedia found to be rather easier than I've imagined. Even though I still don't know every feature in Wikipedia, I'm sure I now can at least be called as an apprentice Wikipedian. The source editing is still a bit tricky, but with the visual editing feature, I have confidence that I can make a whole article just by myself. I also learned that Wikipedia is a real active two-way communication platform. I knew that people could discuss with each other through the 'history' page, since I saw it in the Namuwi...

Assigning copyright, or license to a work is a very important process. Without it, the creator's will to make new creation might be deterred because no matter how hard and long it took them to make the result, other people might copy it with a single click. But not everyone thinks that these kinds of restrictions are always good. In fact, too strict restrainment of copyright might harm the development of culture instead of assisting it. This is why the movement of free culture has appeared. The basic concept of free content, made by free culture movement, is to let the creators freely contribute to the content that has been already made by others. By doing so, it aims to create a deeper volume of content and a healthy virtuous circle in the content platform. Remix culture is a term inside the free culture, which allows people to freely combine or adjust already existing content and make a new one. Inspirations are very shy, and we will never know what kind of inspiration we might e...

1. Summary Wikipedia contains many cultures of its own. They have their own Holliday, memes to laugh around, a contest, games, rules, and so on. Because Wikipedia has come to grow in such a large size, it also has affected the outside world with its traits. As Wikipedia gain influence over many people, people started to create a similar platform that works like Wikipedia. Not only did these new platforms took the shape of an encyclopedia, they sometimes were in the shape of games, comics, novels, and etc. By taking the basic characteristic of Wikipedia, collective intelligence, many new forms of platforms in our everyday life has appeared in a new way. 2. Learned I knew that Wikipedia is a very large internet site. It has a number of  6,078,272 articles in English Wikipedia only, by the date of May 15th 2020. But who'd ever thought that an anonymous contributing website would create holidays for itself? I'm not sure if this is just a joke or not, but they made a holiday f...

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 ...

Let's review some of our edits. What do you find difficult? What do you find most enjoyable? The article that I want to show you is  공유 세계관 . Well, it is still written in my sandbox, but it is almost complete. It took me quite an hour to write it this much even though I had most of the citations ready. What I found most difficult is when translating from the English article to Korean article, there are many internal links to other publishment made by authors in other country and I never heard or have seen such a book, film and so on, but I need to describe how it fits into the 'shared universe'. If I just translate it in Korean, it doesn't make any sense. So I had to search for many other articles that explain such publishments. Meanwhile, what I found enjoyable was seeing how an article made 100% by me is getting into shape more and more every week. It kind of felt like building a sandcastle when I was a kid. This is how it looked on the first week  and you can ...

The book introduces the way Wikipedia functions, what causes trouble, what we should develop, and how Wikipedians should behave through historical and ethnographical study. The writer Joesph M. Reagle demonstrates his view and real insights that happened and is happening in Wikipedia through 8 chapters. The book talks about how Wikipedia can benefit people's society, and also how it might harm the way of living. While also showing how Wikipedia's vision is hesitated by people and also how it is being developed by people. The book contains a sense of anthem for mankind, delivering the message that good-faith collaboration is somewhat of a hard thing to achieve due to our natural born traits, but also strongly believe that someday, it can be achieved only with the hands of us, human. Any collaborative work that doesn't directly benefit the contributing individuals has to go through the same troubles as Wikipedia does. And when the anonymity is added to it, a burning hell on...

Why do people contribute to Wikipedia? They are not getting paid... I think the reason why people contribute to Wikipedia even though they are not getting any money from doing so is because of their natural desire. What I mean by 'natural desire' can be described with Maslow's hierarchy of needs. An organism can survive with sufficient energy generated from food, water, and rest. But we humans desire more than just surviving. After physical needs are acquired we long for safety such as house, fence, or extermination of danger. After that, Maslow describes we need social belonging, that's why we form a society. Later is the needs for esteem, which controls the desire for feeling accomplishment, The final hierarchy of Maslow's pyramid is the need for self-actualization, the feeling of longing to be the best oneself. Wikipedia gratifies the 3rd and 4th floor of the hierarchy, which is the need for belonging and esteem. By doing Wikipedia people feels t...

1)Summary Wikipedia has become more influential in today's societies. As Wikipedia becomes to be containing more reliable sources, people tend to believe that information in Wikipedia is the standard of the real world around them. The perspective of this phenomenon differs as the generation and people's norms change. Sometimes, it is criticized because it makes people think that an encyclopedic platform is essential to their everyday life, sometimes it is praised for its opportunity given to people who read rich the information in it. We still do not know whether we should abandon it, or keep it by developing it in a better way. But what we do know is that people's longing for this kind of instrument has long been with us for many centuries and it won't disappear in a day or two. But can it really exist in a way that it 'pillars' about itself? Can it stay at a neutral point of view? Can it have good faith collaboration all the time? After all, it is a work of ...

1) Summary When participating in Wikipedia, following the community norm is important, because those norms have led the Wikipedia till now, and it will keep on leading it furthermore. In general, Wikipedia has five crucial rules, which is called 5 pillars; having the quality of information, neutral point of view, free content for anyone available to edit, respect and have good faiths on other Wikipedian, and finally, remembering that Wikipedia does not have a firm rule. These rules are the very basic, yet the most strong rules that have sustained the environment of Wikipedia. You need to be objective, but at the same time, be civil, have a sense of a humor or two, and also open to other ideas just like the Wikipedia itself. But because Wikipedia is open; free for anyone to edit, Wikipedia suffers from trolling such as vandalism, low quality of information is some of the articles, and having assaults from the outside community with certain purposes or perspectives. Freedom can be a go...

1) Summary If there would be one wish in this world; a wish that mankind has never stopped hoping for, it would probably: A world that no one gets hurt and just be happy. Childish, yet so hard to achieve, many of us might agree about its presence in our mind, but again, we also know that all of us would be shaking our heads against it becoming real. Everyone has a different aspect, life, and everything. In this world understanding a single person is hard enough for an individual. But we don't have to be disappointed by it because it's impossible for now. If we stop wanting it, then that will be the moment when it really becomes just a wish, not a destination. There could be many ways to arrive there, and the vision of Wikipedia is also headed for the destination of this wish. Wikipedia contains many yearnings from many people. It didn't just pop up from nowhere. Instead, it has slowly, yet certainly been built through many trials and errors, changes by era-status, and fin...

This week, I edited draft of  ko:공유세계관  article in my sandbox as a translation of English Wikipedia article of the  shared universe . As a summary of my edit, I finished the lead paragraph which is the short version of the whole idea of the shared universe article. A shared universe indicates a fictional spectrum of a world made by the same artists or publishers. The incidents recorded in the timeline of the universe are shared by every character in the same universe. As an easy example, on the Marvel Cinematic Universe(MCU), Ironman, Captian America, and many other heroes have their solo movie, and not all of them are seen on every screen. But in the background setting their world has the same timeline, which means even though they weren't at the movie, they were somewhere in the movie's universe. I also edited the definition of the shared universe written by Don Markstein. He illustrates what is a shared universe and what is not, by the 5 rules he made, and added cita...

While I was clicking the 'Random Article' tab on the left side of the Wikipedia page, searching for an article that I may have some interest or some information so I can edit it, Wikipedia took me to an article named Defense Security Command , which in Korean, called Gimusa(기무사). It was a real coincidence because the troop that I had my military service was it. So, with a slight bit of interest and bitterness in my head and stomach, I read through the article. It didn't take me much time because it wasn't very long. One surprising thing that I found was that the article was written as if DSC is still on the roll, even though it was dismantled in the year of 2018. So I checked the history of that article and only 4 people edited the article since the incident, and it was just minor changes on contents. So I wrote what I knew about the dismantle incident of DSC, and its reorganization as DSSC. After that, I searched through the internet and cited my paragraph. I was a...

To start with the conclusion, I think it's because as time goes by, the number of people who are familiar with the digital world from their birth is keep on increasing, and the number of people who aren't is decreasing. Since I was born in Korea, I'll explain it with the situation that is ongoing in Korea. South Korea's economy has developed at a significantly fast speed. From the Korean War which was stopped in 1953, it took only about 50 years for S. Korea to become one of the well-living countries in the world. This rapid change affected many parts of the citizens and the media that people accept information has been also affected by it over the past 50 years. In the 1950s, obviously, the information receiving channel that people trust the most was the newspaper and book, since there was hardly a single family with a television in their house. Then it became conventional media, such as television, radio and computer when the year came to the 2000s. Now, as we know...

What is this comic about? Can you explain it? Citation is a mark you can easily see in Wikipedia and almost every website which claims to have information of approved trustworthy. Because without citation, we might not find any proof that the information that we are reading is a fact, or just a story made up by the writer who is pretending or thinking that he/she is posting up a fact. So, if you find [citation needed] sign next to a paragraph or on the top of the article, it means that the website, or a patrol of Wikipedia is asking the you, if you are the writer, "How can you prove this?". This is a policy strictly applied in Wikipedia because, reliable sources of information are the very core characteristic of Wikipedia's success. If you just ignore this, your article will never be able to reach a good article class. Now, back to the comic. Through web surf research, I found that the above picture is a comic published by popular webcomic ' xkcd'...

Basically, there are three ways to publish a book. First, it's self-publishing: which is that the writer supply for all the money on the process of bookmaking and he/she does all the job of it too. Second is one's-own-expense publishing: which is to pay money to a publishing company and let them do the bookmaking, distribution, and also the advertisement with extra cost. The final way is planned-publishing: The publishing company selects the manuscript that has been submitted or has won the prize in their own contest. Printed book publishing needs a lot of work such as editing, bookmaking, distributing. So it is a hard job for non-professional publishers to do it all by themselves. understandably, this made the early 2000's publishing process mostly of planned-publishing. But, the situation never stays the same forever. Over the past few years, the preference for paper books is decreasing, and as its rebound, the preference for E-books is increasing. It's because of t...

The very first time that I learned about the term 'collective intelligence' was when I read the book named Childhood's end which was published by Arthur Clark in 1953. In this book, humanity's mind gets combined as one and eventually becomes a perfect living organism that is described as 'mere god'. Of course, collective intelligence in real life is quite a little bit different from that of the book. But still, I believe it is a miracle-like ability originated by our special skill, the skill to accumulate the information. The basic idea is like this: For example, let's say I know what a tree and a fish are. While Prof. Piotr knows what a tree and a rock are. If we share our information, we both get to know 3 ideas, a tree, a fish, and a rock. Unlike the physical assets, the information doesn't disappear even though you give it away to someone else. So for the most thrilling part, the more people get different, the more people have things to share an...