Blogging through Wikipedia (2026)

This week’s reading material was about how categories are created and used on Wikipedia. While categories are certainly a useful tool for organizing articles, the reading argued that they are not the only way to navigate collections of pages. Among the concepts discussed, I learned that categories should be verifiable, neutral, and defining in order to properly classify an article. I had originally struggled with categorization, but after reading this article, I feel that future Wikipedia translation work will become a little easier for me.  However, I also think that categorization can differ depending on how individuals interpret an article. For example, in an article about a somewhat controversial historical figure, some editors may choose to include categories related to the figure’s achievements, while others may add more negative or controversial categories. Since Wikipedia must maintain neutrality above all else, I believe further discussion is needed on how to avoid bias wh...

 Wikipedia's Did you know (DYK) is one of the main sections exposed on Wikipedia's main page, which is a project that introduces newly written or expanded documents that are more than five times larger than before, or selected as Good Objects. To be listed on DYK, it must meet the rules of novelty, quantity, evidence-making, policy compliance, and mutual review, and operate through strict standards and mutual review. DYK's purpose is to inform readers of new knowledge, encourage editors, and revitalize the community.  I thought documents on Wikipedia's main page were simply selected by administrators or automatically recommended by algorithms, but I found out that they were actually selected by the editors' thorough peer review system and strict rules. In particular, the QPQ requirement, which obliges editors to review other people's writings if they participate more than five times, was impressive in that it naturally gave editors the role of reviewers.  DYK gi...

Through a close reading of Wikipedia’s guideline on “Categorization,” I have gained a new understanding of the deeper logic behind knowledge organization. At first, I intuitively thought that categorization was merely about attaching simple labels to articles to help readers find information. However, this article made me realize that Wikipedia’s categorization system is far from a random collection of keywords; rather, it is a fundamental structural component of the entire knowledge system. The true value of categorization lies in building a logical and hierarchical knowledge network, enabling information to be efficiently discovered and utilized even when content is extensive and complex. Without proper categorization, even high-quality information may be buried within an overwhelming number of articles. The guideline clearly states that categories must accurately reflect the core attributes of an article, avoid over-categorization or redundancy, and strictly follow hierarchical rela...

Participating in Wikipedia Discussions and Peer Review This week, I participated in Wikipedia discussions by leaving comments on several talk pages. I reviewed articles that required additional citations, source verification, or possible content removal, and shared my opinions on how the articles could be improved. Through this process, I learned that Wikipedia editing is not only about adding information, but also about discussing content with other editors and reaching a consensus. While writing comments on talk pages, I realized how important reliable sources are for maintaining the quality of Wikipedia articles. Even when information seems correct, it can be questioned if there is not enough evidence to support it. This experience helped me better understand the role of verification and transparency in collaborative knowledge production. I also reviewed a classmate’s Wikipedia article and provided feedback. I focused on the organization of the content, the use of references, and th...

  This week, I spent a lot of time working on references and citation templates. Compared with adding content, I found that formatting sources correctly can sometimes take even more time. One thing I learned is that citation templates are quite sensitive. A missing title, language parameter, or other small detail can create warning messages even when the source itself is correct. Because of this, I had to carefully check and adjust several references. This experience made me realize that Wikipedia editing is not only about writing information. A large part of the work is making sure information is presented in a clear and verifiable way for other readers and editors.

Section 1: Summary This week's reading was about how Wikipedia organizes its articles through a categorization system. The basic idea is pretty simple: every Wikipedia page should belong to at least one category, and each page should be placed only in the most specific categories to which it logically belongs. Categories are organized like overlapping trees, all ultimately connecting back to one top-level category called "Category:Contents." So in theory, you can start at the top and drill down through subcategories to find anything on Wikipedia. When a category gets too large, it gets broken down into smaller subcategories — for example, Category:Albums might be split by artist, by date, or by genre. The video added some context about how categories work alongside other navigation tools like lists and templates, each serving slightly different purposes but complementing each other rather than competing. Section 2: Something New I Learned I honestly never thought about ho...

One of the most interesting things I learned while exploring Wikipedia is the important role that media plays in sharing knowledge. Before reading about Wikipedia’s media guidelines, I mainly thought of Wikipedia as a collection of articles and text-based information. However, I discovered that images, videos, and audio files are essential tools that help readers understand topics more clearly and efficiently. Visual content can make complex information easier to grasp and create a more engaging learning experience. I was also surprised by how carefully Wikipedia manages media files. Every image or video must comply with copyright and licensing requirements before it can be used. Most media resources are uploaded through Wikimedia Commons, where contributors from around the world voluntarily share content under free licenses. This reflects Wikipedia’s commitment to both accessibility and legal responsibility. At the same time, learning about media on Wikipedia raised several interestin...

By studying the Wikipedia:Article development guide, as a university student, I have gained a deeper understanding of Wikipedia's operational logic and knowledge co-construction philosophy. In the past, I often viewed Wikipedia as a static "ready-made answer repository," merely complaining when encountering poorly quality entries without ever seriously considering whether I could contribute to its improvement. This guide clearly points out that Wikipedia entries are never static products, but rather dynamic entities of knowledge that are continuously revised and improved. "Improving entries" goes far beyond simply expanding content; it involves optimizing structure, streamlining logic, standardizing language, ensuring the reliability of sources, and improving readability. Most importantly, the guide repeatedly emphasizes the two cornerstone principles of neutrality and verifiability—which perfectly align with the information discernment, fact-checking, and neutr...

 The Wikipedia category is a system that helps users navigate information easily by grouping documents on similar topics together. When you put a markup of the [[Category:Category name]] type at the bottom of a document, it will automatically be registered as a category. Categories themselves can also belong to higher categories, forming a flexible tree structure that moves between lower and higher categories.  I previously thought of categories as a natural classification system while using Wikipedia. However, as I actually edited Wikipedia and read the Help document, I realized that this category system was the result of Wikipedia editors' hard work. It was interesting to note that categories are beings that can be changed or disappeared by discussion rather than objective truths, as Wikipedia also has a space to discuss category deletion, merging, and name change.  Then, I questioned how objective categories can be. Since categories are ultimately categorized by people...

 Revising My Wikipedia Article This week, I revised my Wikipedia article based on feedback and continued improving the overall quality of the page. I corrected formatting issues, added additional references, and reorganized some sections to improve readability. One thing I learned from this process is that Wikipedia editing is not just about creating content, but also about continuous revision and improvement. Feedback from professors and classmates can help editors notice problems they may have missed before. Through repeated editing and revision, I feel that my understanding of Wikipedia’s collaborative system has become much deeper. I also gained more confidence in using Wikipedia editing tools and following encyclopedia-style writing standards.

Reviewing Another Student’s Wikipedia Article This week, I reviewed another student’s Wikipedia article and provided feedback. Through this process, I realized that peer review is an important part of collaborative editing because it helps improve the quality of articles. While reading another student’s work, I focused on checking the organization, references, and clarity of the writing. I suggested adding more citations and improving the structure of certain sections to make the article easier to understand. This experience also helped me reflect on my own article. By evaluating another editor’s work, I became more aware of common editing problems and learned new ways to improve my own writing and formatting on Wikipedia.

Preparing My Wikipedia Article for Review This week, I focused on preparing my Wikipedia article for review. I carefully checked the article structure, references, and writing style to make sure the content was clear and properly organized. During the editing process, I realized that even small details such as formatting and citation style are important for improving article quality. I also reviewed similar Wikipedia articles to better understand how historical topics are usually written. Preparing the article for review helped me reflect on how much progress I have made since the beginning of the course. I learned not only technical editing skills, but also how collaborative knowledge production works on online platforms like Wikipedia.

 Continuing My Wikipedia Editing This week, I continued improving my Wikipedia article by adding more historical information and organizing the structure more clearly. I spent time checking references and improving internal links so that readers could better understand the topic. One challenge was making sure the article followed Wikipedia’s neutral tone. I learned that Wikipedia writing should avoid personal opinions and focus only on verifiable information supported by reliable sources. I also became more familiar with editing tools such as adding citations, categories, and formatting sections. Compared to the beginning of the semester, I now feel much more comfortable editing Wikipedia pages and understanding how collaborative editing works.

  Good Faith Collaboration on Wikipedia This week, I learned about the idea of “Good Faith Collaboration” on Wikipedia. One important lesson from the reading was that Wikipedia editors should assume that other contributors are trying to improve the encyclopedia, even if mistakes happen. I think this principle is very important because Wikipedia is a collaborative platform where many people from different backgrounds work together. Sometimes editors may disagree about sources, wording, or formatting, but assuming good faith helps reduce unnecessary conflict. While working on my own Wikipedia article, I also realized that communication and respect are important. Even small edits can affect the quality of an article, so editors need to cooperate with each other. Through this week’s materials, I better understood how collective intelligence depends on trust and collaboration between users.

Editing a Historical Wikipedia Article This week, I continued working on my Wikipedia article about Xuejian Town in historical Fengtian City. While editing the page, I learned that writing Wikipedia articles requires much more than simply translating information. It is important to organize information clearly, provide reliable references, and follow Wikipedia’s neutral writing style. One interesting part of this work was learning about the history of Japanese-era city planning in Fengtian. I added information about roads, public spaces, and religious buildings that once existed in the area. I also practiced adding internal links and references correctly. Through this editing process, I realized that Wikipedia editing is a form of collaborative knowledge production. Even small edits such as formatting, citations, or category changes can improve the quality of an article. This experience helped me better understand how collective intelligence works in online communities.

Section 1: Summary This week's reading was about how Wikipedia articles develop over time, from basically nothing to (ideally) a polished, comprehensive entry. The page outlines a quality scale that goes from Stub → Start → C → B → Good Article (GA) → Featured Article (FA). A stub is just a few sentences, enough to establish that a topic exists and deserves its own page. From there, editors gradually add content, fix sources, clean up writing, and improve structure. Once an article is reasonably complete, it can be nominated for Good Article status, which involves a peer review process. Featured Articles are the top tier — they go through a more rigorous review for accuracy, neutrality, and writing quality. The video on advanced editing added more detail about what "high quality" actually means on Wikipedia: well-sourced claims, a neutral tone, clear structure, and no original research. Section 2: Something New I Learned What surprised me was how honest the Wikipedia comm...

This reading material explains the process of how a Wikipedia article is developed from start to finish. It also provides various methods for writing a good article, such as finding and incorporating relevant elements and conducting peer reviews. For anyone who has taken Professor Piotr's class, the content will feel very familiar, and I read this text keeping in mind that it could be a great way to recheck the article I wrote this semester. Before the semester ends, I should take some time to review and reflect on it using this reading material. Based on the contents of this reading, I was able to evaluate whether the article I translated is a good one. However, I wonder what other methods exist besides the ones mentioned here. I think it would be great to have a discussion about this.

 Before learning about Wikimedia Commons, I simply thought it was a website where people could upload and download images for free. However, after reading its policies and FAQ pages, I realized that Commons is actually built on a much deeper foundation of copyright awareness, community collaboration, and shared responsibility. One thing that surprised me was how strict Commons is about copyright. Every file must either belong to the public domain or be released under a free license that allows others to reuse and modify it. This requirement helps ensure that content can be legally shared around the world. It also made me reflect on how easily people use images found online without considering whether they have permission to do so. I was also impressed by the fact that Commons is maintained almost entirely by volunteers. People contribute not only by uploading media files but also by reviewing licenses, organizing categories, and monitoring content quality. This shows how a large di...

This semester, I decided to translate the "Apocalyptic literature" and "Global catastrophic risk" articles into Korean, and this week, I wrapped up the translation for "Apocalyptic literature." But I ran into a bit of a snag with the {{sfn}} templates . When I was moving the citations over, I realized most of them were formatted using {{sfn}} . Copying the templates themselves is straightforward, but the catch is that the Korean Wikipedia uses a different format for {{sfn}} compared to the English version. This caused way too many discrepancies between my translation and the original article. So, I used the dashboard to ask my professor for advice, and we’re going to work on fixing it together in our next class. Since I’ve been translating Wikipedia articles since last year, I thought I had the hang of it by now. But seeing myself struggle to handle new, unexpected issues made me realize I still have a long way to go and need to study more. To fix this k...

This reading talks about Wikimedia Commons and explains how people can upload and share media files such as photos, videos, and audio. The FAQ mainly focuses on copyright rules and free licenses. I learned that Commons only accepts files that everyone can freely use and share. The reading also explains that users should add descriptions, categories, and source information when uploading files. These rules help keep the website organized and useful for people around the world. One thing I found interesting is that not every image on the internet can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Even if the image is easy to find online, people still need permission or a free license. I also did not know that Commons stores many kinds of media, not only photos. Another interesting point is how important categories are because they help other users quickly find files they need. One question I have is whether the copyright rules are too difficult for beginners. New users may not fully understand licens...

 Wikimedia Commons is a free media repository that provides multimedia content that anyone can use freely. Content that can be uploaded is limited to multimedia, excluding text or mobile app software. All files uploaded to Commons must be in the public domain or under a free license such as CC BY/BY-SA, and do not accept 'fair use' works. In addition, Commons uses categories and gallery systems complementarily to manage media systematically.  In the case of works imported from external sites, it was impressive that even if the original author changes the CC license to paid conditions later, the free license that has been uploaded to Commons and has already been verified will remain in effect and will not be deleted. This seems to be a reasonable rule to ensure the stability of digital archiving, and at the same time, there seems to be a limit that the rights of the original author may not be sufficiently protected.  However, I wondered if it would be a loss as a media sto...

 After carefully reading the FAQ of Wikimedia Commons, I gradually came to realize that this platform is not merely a simple media repository, but rather an open sharing system built upon strict copyright regulations and a culture of collaboration. The platform repeatedly emphasizes that “free use” does not mean “use without restrictions.” All content uploaded to Commons must either be in the public domain or licensed under free licenses that explicitly allow commercial use and derivative works, such as Creative Commons licenses. This made me aware that many images we casually search for and use online may not actually have proper authorization, and using them freely could lead to copyright risks. At the same time, Commons relies entirely on volunteers for uploading, categorizing, reviewing, and managing content. There is no central editorial team or financial incentive driving participation. This reflects a user-centered collaborative model that depends on community consensus and ...

Summary This week's reading, Wikipedia:Article development, explains how Wikipedia articles evolve from their earliest form into polished, comprehensive pieces. Most articles start off as stubs and ideally grow into well-written, comprehensive articles with time. The page walks through each stage of this process: a stub is the most basic starting point, often just a sentence or two, and from there an article can move up to Start class, then B class, then Good Article, and eventually Featured Article status. Article quality assessments are mainly performed by members of WikiProjects, who tag talk pages of articles. What I found useful is that the page also gives practical advice — it lists tools and resources for finding underdeveloped articles that need work, and it emphasizes that skipping stages is not just permissible, it is in fact recommended. So there's no expectation that you have to build an article one small step at a time. What I Found Interesting The thing that stood...

Summary This week I read through the Commons:FAQ page on Wikimedia Commons, which is basically a repository of freely licensed media — images, audio, video, and so on — that anyone can use for any Wikimedia project or even outside of it. The key rule is that any freely licensed media file that is useful for any Wikimedia project can be uploaded, and the licenses must allow for commercial use and the creation of derivative works. That's actually a stricter standard than I expected. It doesn't just mean "free to look at" — it has to be free enough that someone could, say, use it in a commercial product. Commons does not accept fair use justifications, and media licensed exclusively under non-commercial-only licenses like CC BY-NC-SA are also not accepted. So it's a pretty high bar. The FAQ also covers practical things like what happens when you upload something and later want to take it down — which, it turns out, is generally not possible once the file has been on ...

1. Summary This week’s class was about advanced Wikipedia editing and how to write good, high-quality articles. We learned the main rules: using reliable sources, keeping a neutral tone, and organizing the content clearly. The lesson also explained how to request peer reviews to get feedback and improve our work. All these rules are there to keep Wikipedia’s information accurate and trustworthy. 2. Interesting Learning Point The most surprising thing for me was realizing what makes an article “high quality.” I always thought adding more facts was enough, but it turns out citing sources correctly, writing in a neutral way, and having a clear structure are just as important. I also didn’t know you could ask for an assessment to get feedback on your work. It feels really helpful for new editors like me. 3. Question for Discussion I’m still confused about how to keep up with these high standards when I want to contribute quickly. When I edit a topic I care about, I get excited to add infor...

Section 1: Summary This week's reading was the Wikipedia article on remix culture, along with the second half of the "Topics in Sociology: Internet" video. The basic idea of remix culture is that creativity has always involved borrowing and building on existing work — people have been doing this forever, not just online. The article talks about how Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard law professor, drew a distinction between "Read Only" (RO) culture and "Read/Write" (RW) culture. In RO culture, regular people are just passive consumers — content gets made by professionals and flows one way. RW culture flips that: people don't just consume, they participate, respond, and create new things from existing material. The internet has been a huge driver of this shift. Things like blogs, YouTube, and memes are all examples of everyday people producing and remixing content rather than just watching it. Copyright law, though, hasn't really kept up — it still most...

Section 1: Summary This week I went through the Creative Commons FAQ and the Wikimedia Commons FAQ, both of which are basically about how images and media can be shared legally online. Creative Commons has six different types of licenses, and they all require attribution — meaning you have to credit whoever made the original work. The licenses vary depending on whether you allow commercial use, adaptations, or require people to share their changes under the same license. Wikimedia Commons is a huge media repository connected to Wikipedia, and it only accepts files that are either in the public domain or under a "free" license — specifically ones that allow commercial use AND derivative works. So licenses like CC BY-NC (non-commercial only) are actually not accepted on Commons, which I didn't expect. Section 2: Something New I Learned I didn't realize that once you upload something to Wikimedia Commons under a free license, you basically can't take it back. The lic...

1. Summary This week, we mainly learned how to use and manage media materials such as images, videos, and audio on Wikipedia. Unlike text content, these visual and audio materials have more complex copyright requirements and stricter upload standards. The course mentioned that all media files on Wikipedia, including those on Wikivoyage pages, must have legal authorization, and the source and copyright proof must be clearly stated to avoid infringement. It also noted that good media materials can make articles richer and easier to read, helping us understand difficult knowledge; however, using unqualified or unauthorized materials may not only be illegal but also make Wikipedia entries untrustworthy, so such content is usually deleted quickly. 2. Interesting Learning Point Through this week’s study, I have a clearer understanding that Wikipedia strictly prohibits image theft and uploading unauthorized photos. I used to think that as an editor, I could just find a picture online or take ...

This week, I worked on translating the Apocalyptic literature article into Korean. At first, I thought it would be manageable since I had become accustomed to translation work itself, but the article contained many references to ancient biblical texts, which made me think carefully about whether I should translate terms phonetically or preserve the nuance and style of the original language. In addition, I spent quite a long time cross-checking the contents of related articles connected to the one I was translating in order to verify whether certain statements and expressions were actually accurate. However, I felt that this process would ultimately help improve my ability to translate classical Wikipedia articles, so I devoted myself fully to the work. In the end, I was very satisfied with the final result, which made the experience rewarding.

1. Summary After reading this section, I learned that Wikipedia uses images, videos, and other media to help explain information more clearly. Media files can make articles easier to understand and more interesting for readers. Editors usually upload media through Wikimedia Commons, and the files must follow copyright and free-license rules. 2. Interesting Points I found it interesting that Wikipedia carefully checks whether images and media can legally be shared. I also learned that media is important because pictures and videos can help readers understand topics faster than text alone. Another interesting point is that many media files on Wikipedia are created and shared by volunteers around the world. 3. Questions or Discussion One question I have is how Wikipedia handles media that may contain incorrect or misleading information. I also wonder if some important topics have too few images because of copyright restrictions. Another discussion point is whether visual media makes ...

  Understanding Wikipedia: Images and Other Media Images and other media are important parts of Wikipedia because they help readers understand information more clearly and make articles more engaging. I learned that Wikipedia uses not only photographs, but also videos, audio files, maps, diagrams, and illustrations. These media materials are usually uploaded through Wikimedia Commons, which stores free and reusable content for Wikipedia projects. One interesting point is that every image or media file must follow copyright and licensing rules. Wikipedia strongly supports free culture, so most files need to be original work, public domain, or shared under open licenses. I also discovered that editors must provide descriptions and source information for uploaded media. This helps improve transparency and reliability. Another thing I found interesting is that media can make complex topics easier to understand. For example, historical photos, scientific diagrams, or pronunciation audio...

The reading about remix culture explains how people today do not only watch or read media but also change, reuse, and create new content from it. Lawrence Lessig describes this as a “read-write culture,” where people can participate and share their own ideas through things like memes, remix music, fan fiction, and video edits. The article explains that digital technology and the internet have made remixing much easier because people can now share and edit content quickly online. It also mentions that remixing is not completely new because artists, musicians, and writers in the past also borrowed ideas from older works. However, the internet has allowed ordinary people, not only professionals, to become creators as well. One point I found interesting was how remix culture gives younger generations more freedom to express themselves creatively. Many people use remixes to communicate ideas, humor, or opinions in ways that are easy for others to understand online. I also found it interesti...

 After reading this Wikipedia page on "Remix Culture," I gained many insights into the essence of creation. As a university student who frequently uses various digital tools and surfs the internet, I was deeply moved by its division of cultural media into "Read Only" and "Read/Write," and its meticulous tracing of their development. It made me realize that in the long analog era, expensive production equipment and limited reproduction technology kept most of us in a passive, "read-only" role. This powerful industrial inertia was not a natural phenomenon, but a product shaped by specific technologies and laws. Today, the widespread adoption of digital technology has re-empowered ordinary people with the "creative ability" of writing on paper; smartphones and computers are the best proof of this return to "read-write culture." The subsequent description of the booming development of remix culture in the internet and Web 2.0 era,...

 After reading this article on Wikipedia, I realized that for an ordinary college student like myself, Wikipedia is no longer just a starting point for secretly researching while writing papers; it has become a mirror reflecting contemporary culture, cognition, and power struggles. What impressed me most was the article's mention of Poland erecting a physical monument for Wikipedia contributors—this made me realize how many strangers' selfless contributions of knowledge are behind those obscure entries I casually browse. That sense of belonging, that "seeking knowledge is not lonely," is warmer to me than any authoritative textbook. At the same time, the humorous portrayals of Wikipedia in popular culture also bring a smile: comics parodying its grammar, variety shows satirizing its "consensus is truth" (Wikiality), and even in the film *Tahr*, a single altered page is enough to break down the protagonist's defenses—these scenarios work precisely because...

 Before learning about remix culture, I often thought that creativity meant producing something completely original. However, this reading helped me realize that many creative works are actually built on ideas that already exist. Whether in music, art, literature, or online media, people have always borrowed, adapted, and reinterpreted earlier works. The internet has simply made this process more visible and accessible to everyone. One idea that stood out to me was the difference between “Read Only” culture and “Read/Write” culture. In the past, most people mainly consumed content created by professionals. Today, social media platforms and digital tools allow ordinary users to participate in content creation. Making memes, editing videos, creating fan content, or even contributing to collaborative websites are all examples of people actively engaging with media rather than just passively consuming it. I was also surprised to realize that platforms like Wikipedia reflect this partic...

  This week, I returned to editing after exam week and spent more time working on translations and references again. Compared to the beginning of the semester, I feel more familiar with Wikipedia editing now, although I still make small mistakes sometimes. One thing I noticed is that editing becomes easier when I first read how existing pages are organized. Looking at other editors’ work helped me understand better how information is usually structured on Wikipedia. I also realized that many edits on Wikipedia are actually small improvements rather than major changes. Even fixing links, wording, or citations can help improve the quality of a page.

  1) Summary of the reading This reading explains how categorization works as an organizational system in Wikipedia. Categories are used to group related articles so that users can navigate content more easily and understand how topics are connected. Each article can belong to one or multiple categories, and categories themselves can also be nested within broader categories, forming a hierarchical structure. The guideline also emphasizes that categorization should be clear, useful, and consistent, helping both readers and editors organize knowledge in a logical way. However, editors are encouraged not to overuse categories or create unnecessary ones, since too many categories can make the system confusing instead of helpful.   2) New or interesting points One interesting point is that categorization on Wikipedia is not just a technical tool, but also a way of shaping how knowledge is structured and understood. It influences how users “see” relationships between topics. I al...

  1) Summary of the reading This reading explains how categories work on Wikipedia and how they are used to organize content. Categories are a system that groups related pages together, helping users navigate large amounts of information more efficiently. Each Wikipedia page can be assigned to one or more categories by adding category tags in the editing interface. Once added, these categories appear at the bottom of the page and automatically link the article to a broader network of related topics. Category pages themselves also contain lists of all pages included in them, forming a hierarchical structure that helps organize knowledge systematically.   2) New or interesting points One interesting point is that categories are not just simple labels, but part of a structured system that creates a network of knowledge. Pages can belong to multiple categories, and categories can also belong to other categories, forming a hierarchy or even a complex graph structure. I also fou...

  1) Summary of the reading This reading explains how Wikipedia articles are created and developed over time. It shows that article creation is not a single-step process, but a gradual cycle that includes drafting, editing, reviewing, and improving content. New articles often start as short “stub” pages and are expanded through contributions from multiple editors. The development process is guided by core Wikipedia principles such as neutrality, verifiability, and reliable sourcing. Articles may also move between draft space and main space depending on whether they meet quality standards. Overall, the reading highlights that Wikipedia articles are continuously evolving rather than being fixed products.   2) New or interesting points One interesting point is that Wikipedia treats article writing as an ongoing collaborative process rather than individual authorship. A page can pass through many stages and many contributors before becoming stable. I also found it interesting t...

  1) Summary of the reading This reading introduces Wikimedia Commons as a free media repository that stores images, videos, and audio files for use across Wikimedia projects such as Wikipedia. It explains that Commons is maintained by volunteers and only accepts freely licensed or public domain content. The main requirement is that all materials must be legally reusable by anyone, including for commercial use and modification. The FAQ also clarifies that Commons is not a general file storage platform, but a structured database designed specifically for reusable educational and informational media. It also emphasizes strict copyright rules and explains why non-free content, such as “fair use” material, is not accepted.   2) New or interesting points One interesting point is how strict and consistent Wikimedia Commons is about licensing. Even if an image is widely available online, it cannot be uploaded unless it meets free-license standards that allow reuse, redistribution...