Bubble UGC slowly blown away
Over the past few months, interesting changes have occurred in the concept of the work of the largest online encyclopedias. And these changes indicate that user content is gradually giving way to professional content, more precisely, the orgy and freedom of UGC, some online anarchy is becoming a thing of the past. In its place comes the use of specialists, the moderate use of non-professionals and quite strong control over the creation of content.
About this - that the next web will be the web of professionals talked more than a year ago. Then these ideas caused quite a heated discussion in my blog. However, now these forecasts have become trends.
About changes in the concept of its work, Wikipedia said a few months ago. The main novelty of the encyclopedia became changes to the principles of editing and correcting articles. A regular user will lose the ability to correct the content of encyclopedia articles; this will be available only to editors with a sufficient level of authority. This is not entirely a departure from UGC, however - a partial rejection of the previous principles of work.
')
And Wikipedia is not the only project that has relied on professionals. The online encyclopedia from Google originally planned to use professionals to write articles.
And here is another example - the medical encyclopedia Medpedia does allow only content to be made by those who confirm their education. It is understandable - it was not enough that medical articles were written by ignoramuses, nevertheless.
However, to make a bet only on professionals in our time is quite difficult, the authors of the most famous encyclopedia Britanica understood this and they just went the other way - they refused to exclusively use the work of specialists and began to attract ordinary people to work on the project.
Thus, UGC went through its natural path of development and came to an optimal mechanism of work through trial and error: the power of users is great and it works, self-organizing communities are also good, but the knowledge and skills of professionals who will not be involved in managing communities, by no means, but which will filter the UGC. In projects that are reference resources, such a combination of efforts is more than necessary.
Interestingly, the IT analogue of Wikipedia, the encyclopedia ItPedia, is fully based on the principles of free editing. It will be interesting to observe the development of this project.
About this - that the next web will be the web of professionals talked more than a year ago. Then these ideas caused quite a heated discussion in my blog. However, now these forecasts have become trends.
About changes in the concept of its work, Wikipedia said a few months ago. The main novelty of the encyclopedia became changes to the principles of editing and correcting articles. A regular user will lose the ability to correct the content of encyclopedia articles; this will be available only to editors with a sufficient level of authority. This is not entirely a departure from UGC, however - a partial rejection of the previous principles of work.
')
And Wikipedia is not the only project that has relied on professionals. The online encyclopedia from Google originally planned to use professionals to write articles.
And here is another example - the medical encyclopedia Medpedia does allow only content to be made by those who confirm their education. It is understandable - it was not enough that medical articles were written by ignoramuses, nevertheless.
However, to make a bet only on professionals in our time is quite difficult, the authors of the most famous encyclopedia Britanica understood this and they just went the other way - they refused to exclusively use the work of specialists and began to attract ordinary people to work on the project.
Thus, UGC went through its natural path of development and came to an optimal mechanism of work through trial and error: the power of users is great and it works, self-organizing communities are also good, but the knowledge and skills of professionals who will not be involved in managing communities, by no means, but which will filter the UGC. In projects that are reference resources, such a combination of efforts is more than necessary.
Interestingly, the IT analogue of Wikipedia, the encyclopedia ItPedia, is fully based on the principles of free editing. It will be interesting to observe the development of this project.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/53359/
All Articles