User:BarrrrbY/Report

Wikipedia Reflection
As a free, open-source encyclopedia, Wikipedia has become one of the most widely-used platforms to obtain information on the internet. Through the experience with Wikipedia in this course, I formed a new understanding of this online community. Though the system of Wikipedia is relatively mature and complete, there are a few areas that I believe could be improved.

The first part that Wikipedia can improve is enhancing the reference requirements. While Wikipedia has implemented a policy that all information must come from reliable sources and must be cited, I have noticed some articles with insufficient references or even un-cited paragraphs. In my assigned article The Great Buddha+, some information in the Lead paragraph has no reference. The lack of reference can undermine the credibility and accuracy of the information presented on the platform. Therefore, I think there should be a rule that sets a minimum number of references in each section of the article (at least one citation, for example), and only articles that meet the minimum requirement can be published. This could help to ensure that articles are supported by credible sources and improve the quality of information.

In addition, I believe that implementing a better citation-checking system could significantly enhance the credibility of our sources. While editing my article, since most of the sources I use are written in Chinese, I discovered that it is easy to misquote or misinterpret sources, especially when most of them are written in Chinese. That means people on the English version of Wikipedia can write whatever they want without the fear of being caught for misusing the source because most readers would not understand the source in Chinese (while I did not do that). Therefore, if Wikipedia invests in a system for checking the accuracy of the sources, either by hiring people or using a bot, the credibility of the platform will significantly improve.

The previous two recommendations address the problems with references in Wikipedia. Both lack of references and misinterpreted sources can be considered as norm violations because they break Wikipedia's policy of using references. Widespread norm violation can bring damage to a community. Improving the reference requirement and reliability check system can foster normative behavior among users and gradually build their normative commitment to Wikipedia. This is linked to the feeling of rightness and obligation towards the community. Once people are obliged to protect Wikipedia content's reliability, the norm for using references appropriately will become stronger.

Besides the issues with the reference system, Wikipedia can also improve by creating a more welcoming environment for newcomers and diminishing the barriers for them to enter. Compared to other online communities, I think the user interface design of Wikipedia is relatively inconvenient. I had never noticed buttons such as "edit," "view history," and "talk" until I took this course. Because these buttons are not noticeable, many people like me are unaware that they can easily edit Wikipedia or talk to authors by simply clicking on them. When I started my experience with Wikipedia editing, I struggled to find my "sandbox", which was confusing and reduced my interest in the article editing process. As a result, I believe that the complicated and inconvenient web design has, to some extent, discouraged people from participating. The web design can make Wikipedia more accessible and attractive by applying engaging elements that enhance its accessibility and aesthetic appeal. However, by saying making the web design attractive, it doesn't mean making it too entertaining like other online communities. I understand that Wikipedia is unique and different due to its academic theme. It is most useful in education and knowledge-related areas. Therefore, adding too many entertainment-oriented elements could detract from the distinctiveness of Wikipedia and decrease its sense of reliability and accountability.

In order to make the website more visually appealing and maintain its academic theme at the same time, I suggest highlighting the buttons like "edit," "view history," and "talk" by making them bold, adding some color, or putting them in a shaped icon. This will make the website look more interesting and dynamic rather than plain and uninviting as it currently is. The lecture discussed that valuable users are both attracted and cultivated. Therefore, attracting more users becomes the first important step in community growth. An attractive visual design can enhance users' intrinsic motivation because it makes the community more user-friendly and accessible so that they experience less frustration in the community and would like to spend more time experiencing the community. According to the lecture, researchers have discovered that signers on Change.org are more likely to participate more frequently as they gain more experience with the platform. Thus, once people find it easier to contribute to Wikipedia, they will participate more and more as well.

In conclusion, Wikipedia, as a widely-used reference source and online community, can benefit from improving its reference system and user interface design. By implementing stricter reference requirements, a better citation moderation system, and making the website more visually appealing, Wikipedia can enhance the credibility of the content and encourage greater user participation. These improvements will strengthen the normative commitment of users and create a friendly environment for newcomers to access, which will lead to more significant growth of the Wikipedia community.