Wikipedia Reflection

However, my articles were not edited by my peers in class and those who did edit it were not from my class, while these edits were only minor in nature. Moreover, my attempts to offer Wikilove were not reciprocated after I chose a random person who edited the article but there was no reciprocation. Overall, my experience with Wikipedia was great, exciting, and interesting. although I came to the conclusion I may not do this again due to my lack of experience and the fact that it was too time-consuming. However, if I find something interesting with a poorly-done page or without a page, I may decide to do it again.My first experience after joining Wikipedia was that I was exposed to the rules and guidelines on the site, as well as its nature as a group effort. This experience supported Kraut et al (2011) claim that people are more willing to make contributions on online groups if they like the group. Indeed, although I enjoyed writing the article and posting it, I do not expect that I will do so again because I failed to increase the value of the outcomes for the group members, which reduced their willingness to take part in the group setting. I attempted to increase the commitment of my fellow classmates to my Wikipedia page by attempting to make my page interesting to increase their chances of liking the article. In addition, there was an attempt on my part to create a bond with some of those visiting the page by rewarding them. I tried to follow the rules and guidelines of Wikipedia as much as possible, such as those on naming articles and maintenance of articles (Ayers et al, 2012). I also realized that editing Wikipedia has become more difficult over time compared to the first time I tried it.Kraut et al (2011) make a design claim that people are more likely and willing to make contributions in a group setting if others in the group are also contributing. On posting my article, I realized that the group consisting of my classmates was