User:Yqin98/Preparatory Assignment

My Wikipedia Experience
On Frederic Wakeman

The scope of the information of Frederic Wakeman was limited in his biography and academic career. Because he is known as a scholar and professor, there is no doubt that most information is about his scholarship and research. But more information could be added to his scholarship. For example, there is not a link to his book History and Will: Philosophical Perspectives of Mao Tse-Tung's Thought ，which could offer more accurate information about Wakeman's scholarship and his focus.

'''On Mao Zedong ''' The research information on Mao Zedong is fruitful and insightful. Parts of the information could actually turn into a small article or critique. For example, "Leadership in China" introduced the whole process of Chairman Mao's presidency as well as his political theories and practices. It is not limited to Mao's personal achievement but also the social responses and other government officials' reaction. Different from Wakeman's Wikipedia page which mostly focuses on his biography, a large amount of information on Mao and the historical context of Chinese society efficiently and convincingly creates an image of this historical figure. Although no direct conclusion was made, we could still be convinced of his greatness and complexity in his life with the abundant information given to the viewers.

'''On Dialectical materialism ''' It is hard to judge the scope or accuracy of the page on Dialectical materialism if the audience is not a scholar or have a deep understanding of philosophy. In other words, the information is very technical with a lack of background information and a clear logic of explanation. It is great to have different scholars' opinions, but also the readers are more confused about what the term means. Maybe instead of giving the definition of "the evolution of the natural world and the emergence of new qualities of being at new stages of evolution," maybe simply explaining "dialectical" first as "a tension between two forces and an ongoing process of one conquering or shifting to the other" will be easier for understanding.

'''Conclusion '''

These Wiki pages give a clarification of the terms with very direct information, therefore become an efficient tool of getting to know the meaning of the term. But getting to know is very different from a depth of understanding. Unlike an academic article or a professional journal, the Wikipedia page does not have a "thesis" in it, which means the explanation does not follow a coherent logic that helps you understand the whole concept/theory. The way of understanding a concept through an academic article is by following causes and results, topics and evidence, and it usually goes deeper and deeper as your understanding becomes more and more comprehensive and complete. However, to understand the terms on Wikipedia, we are following other online directories and references, which distracts our attention and thinking. For example, to understand the "Revolutions of 1848," we go to the directory of "absolute monarchy", "German Confederation”, etc. The difference between "human learning" and "machine learning" is a really hard balance for people. Additionally, the information on Wikipedia is very compressed: an enormous knowledge system is explained in limited space. In the case of "modern Chinese philosophy," the page only includes information on "neo-Confucianism." Above all, I see the Wikipedia pages as a kind of dictionary that is itself a process of updating and revising. It could be used as a directory or reference, which needs to be connected and complementary with knowledge from books, people and real life.

'''References '''