By the first glance, the entry of Li Zehou seems to be relatively short comparing to both the rich history of him and his contribution to the academic world. However, the entry is nevertheless nicely balanced, as its content is reasonably divided into four sections (excluding reference and external link, which show up in pretty much every single entry). The four sections respectively focus on Role in Chinese Culture, Critic of Chinese government responses to Tiananmen square, Philosophy of the human being (which is the richest section for that it includes four sub-sections, and Bibliography. The information provided about Li Zehou is generally agreeable, however, the significance of Li's research and his accomplishment is to some extent understated in the entry. For instance, his titles in various institutions were not exhaustively enumerated; moreover, he is identified as historian, writer, and "scholar of philosophy" instead of a "philosopher". To improve this essay, these should be included; also, more of his works should be included in the bibliography section (there's only three! while on Baidupedia, the list contains 24 works[1]). Additionally, though currently I am not yet qualified to make a comment on the width of his research, simply by studying the syllabus I think there can be more sub-sections in the part of entry where his philosophy thoughts are introduced. (It would also be nice to put a picture of Li)
The entry for New culture movement is quite satisfying. It has all the important scholars listed, as well as the major proposals they advocated for, also the historical background of why such movement took place is explained. Additionally, the entry also introduced some later influence of this movement. One thing that I believe the entry can do better is to also display the viewpoints of the antagonists of New Culture movement. (saying this with Mao's spirit of contradictions and struggles) I believe it is not only important to tell why the movement initially took place, but it is equally important to elaborate what kind of opposing voice there was when the movement is in action. (This is done on Baidupedia. The form was brief intro + summary of opinion and actions[2]). Besides this, one thing that may improve the accuracy of the entry is to clearly write the specific proposals of each major leading scholars in the movement--for that though lots of agreement were made, it is still important to show the major differences between groups or individuals, as wikipedia (in tutorial) is said to be a neutral place where opinions from various sides shall all be taken into consideration.
This entry of Li Dazhao is surprisingly short, considering how important a figure China/Chinese government/CCP regard him as. The entry is only a mere biography, with information about his early life, time when he is a Liberian, and later as the co-foudner of CCP. I believe there is a lot more things can be added to the entry. For instance, one thing that I believe must be mentioned is how important the CCP valued him. This is necessary solely because the current entry is too concise that readers unfamiliar with Li would be mislead and think he's relatively not so significant. Additionally, would can also be included is the journals he published on New Youth[3]. Only when both his influence in politics and thoughts are included, the readers can understand the importance of Li Dazhao.
Opportunities and challenges
editIn my understanding, encyclopaedia is not the most authoritative, detailed source for philosophy learning. However, it should be, if not the most, the relatively easiest and most understandable source for people interested in philosophy regardless their knowledge background. Thus, in my vision, the task for wikipedia as an instrument for public philosophy education/informative education, is to first and most importantly grasp the most major points of a theory, an event, a scholar; and second put them in the most understandable and clear words for the readers. If the certain terms had to be included, a link should be included. With these have said, I believe even when introducing the same term, wikipedia should always be aware that it should be displayed different from more academical ones, such as Stanford Philosophy Encyclopaedia[4]. However, this task itself is not easy. Putting things in simple terms does not represent the work would be simple and easy. To transform a complicated philosophical concept into simple terms is already a difficult philosophical task. Besides telling story simple, another task wiki contributors should bear in mind is to include useful relevant information, for the readers to have a more throughly understanding. This is not an easy task either: too much information could get the readers lost, needless to say selecting the "useful" ones already requires the contributor rich knowledge in the specific area. Apart from these challenges, I think wiki is a good platform to make Modern Chinese philosophy accessible to English readers. I think one good way the entries can be constructed is to look into the Chinese version of the entries on wiki and Baidupedia, which is the biggest online encyclopaedia in China. However, during the process it should be beard in mind that there might be some elements in these sources that has an either political or philosophical bias. Wiki contributors should also keep this in mind and do best to erase the bias and prejudices that can easily mislead the readers and deliver wrong information.
- ^ "Li Zehou". Baidu Baike.
- ^ "Xinwenhua yundong". Baidu Baike.
- ^ "My View on Marxism" (PDF). chinasince1644.cheng-tsui.com.
- ^ "Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy".