User:Yaakov Wa.
| Wikipedia:Babel | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||
| Search user languages |
Some Thoughts on Wikipedia (After a month)
I am writing this as I am thinking it, so I may edit and revise this essay later on. These represent my initial thoughts after editing for a month on Wikipedia:
In regards to editing on Wikipedia, I am reminded of a Chasidic teaching on the significance of the signs for a kosher animal which is required to have Split hoofs as well as chew its cud. The spiritual reason given for needing a hoof and the hoof being split is as follows: One must be attached to the physical reality, which is represented by the hoof, which is attached and reaches the ground, yet at the same time one must remain aloof from being sunken in the physical world which is why the hoof is split. One retains a certain aloofness from the physical world, while at the same time remaining connected to worldly matters. Similarly on Wikipedia, one must be connected with the on-the-ground reality. There are people, policies and everything that comes along with it. Yet, at the same time, one must not become affected by others comments. Often-time, a perceived attack is nothing more than a concisely worded message which is merely written in wiki-jargon. If one feels they cannot stop thinking about Wikipedia, and is upset by others comments, it is time to take a reevaluation of oneself and separate temporarily from Wikipedia.[1]
The spiritual reason for chewing the cud, is that one must chew over their thoughts and actions and use ones intellect to evaluate a given course of action and proceed only when an action is coming from ones intellect rather than a hastily thought out emotion. Many times, one believes a given thought is correct and immediately rushes to publicize that belief. One must first chew it over many times until the thought is well evaluated. So too in Wikipedia, one must carefully think over ones actions before hitting that publish button. Take a day or two or even a week to think it over. You may come to the realization that other Wikipedians comments are actually correct.
A personal example of the above is in regards to zoom communication. I initially believed it would be a great medium of communication for discussing ideas. Because, isn't Wikipedia about the exchange of knowledge?. However, upon evaluating and thinking it over for several days, I realized that others have extremely valid points about the limitations of using Zoom. This brings me to a final thought for today. One must realize that people involved in a given field often have reasons that are not immediately understandable to a layperson. We can see this with the Covid-19 vaccine. Often, a layperson has doubts which seem reasonable to him, however, only an expert researcher can correctly analyze the cost-benefit of this specialized field. So too in regards to Wikipedia, certain ideas may seem initially unreasonable to a layperson at Wikipedia, yet, those who know Wikipedia well and are the experts in this field have valid reasons for acting in a certain way.
Blessings,
Yaakov W. Yaakov Wa. (talk) 14:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
List of lessons on Wikipedia
As I edit more on Wikipedia, there are lessons that are learned. This list will serve as my practical thoughts on how best to edit wikipedia. This is subject to change and I may be incorrect about what I write. Also, I will try to uphold these as best as possible. If I do not, please let me know. (preferably through email).
1. Always pursue things in a way of pleasantness. When you need to be firm on ideas, be firm, but do not attack individuals.[2]
- ^ A User that does a model job of this balancing act of connecting with users while remaining aloof from conflict is El_C.
- ^ Don't do what I did here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=1017483551