G'day fellow Wikipedians,
Google has announced that Knol has gone live.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/07/knol-is-open-to-everyone.html
"A few months ago we announcedhttp://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/12/encouraging-people-to-contribute.htmlthat we were testing a new product called Knol http://knol.google.com/. Knols are authoritative articles about specific topics, written by people who know about those subjects. Today, we're making Knol available to everyone.
The web contains vast amounts of information, but not everything worth knowing is on the web. An enormous amount of information resides in people's heads: millions of people know useful things and billions more could benefit from that knowledge. Knol will encourage these people to contribute their knowledge online and make it accessible to everyone. The key principle behind Knol is authorship. Every knol will have an author (or group of authors) who put their name behind their content. It's their knol, their voice, their opinion. We expect that there will be multiple knols on the same subject, and we think that is good."
(More in link)
The Knol website is live here.
The featured content ranges from How to backpack to Type 1 diabetes.
Regards
*Keith Old *
From the NY Times Bits blog see:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/23/wikipedia-meet-knol/index.html?hp
cc'd to Foundation-l.
Nathan
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Keith Old keithold@gmail.com wrote:
G'day fellow Wikipedians,
Google has announced that Knol has gone live.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/07/knol-is-open-to-everyone.html
"A few months ago we announced< http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/12/encouraging-people-to-contribute.html
that
we were testing a new product called Knol http://knol.google.com/. Knols are authoritative articles about specific topics, written by people who know about those subjects. Today, we're making Knol available to everyone.
The web contains vast amounts of information, but not everything worth knowing is on the web. An enormous amount of information resides in people's heads: millions of people know useful things and billions more could benefit from that knowledge. Knol will encourage these people to contribute their knowledge online and make it accessible to everyone. The key principle behind Knol is authorship. Every knol will have an author (or group of authors) who put their name behind their content. It's their knol, their voice, their opinion. We expect that there will be multiple knols on the same subject, and we think that is good."
(More in link)
The Knol website is live here.
The featured content ranges from How to backpack to Type 1 diabetes.
Regards
*Keith Old
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Man, one new yorker cartoon per article. Why didn't wikipedia think of that?
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 2:31 PM, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
From the NY Times Bits blog see: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/23/wikipedia-meet-knol/index.html?hp
cc'd to Foundation-l.
Nathan
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Keith Old keithold@gmail.com wrote:
G'day fellow Wikipedians,
Google has announced that Knol has gone live.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/07/knol-is-open-to-everyone.html
"A few months ago we announced<
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/12/encouraging-people-to-contribute.html
that
we were testing a new product called Knol http://knol.google.com/. Knols are authoritative articles about specific topics, written by people who know about those subjects. Today, we're making Knol available to everyone.
The web contains vast amounts of information, but not everything worth knowing is on the web. An enormous amount of information resides in people's heads: millions of people know useful things and billions more could benefit from that knowledge. Knol will encourage these people to contribute their knowledge online and make it accessible to everyone. The key principle behind Knol is authorship. Every knol will have an
author
(or group of authors) who put their name behind their content. It's their knol, their voice, their opinion. We expect that there will be multiple knols on the same subject, and we think that is good."
(More in link)
The Knol website is live here.
The featured content ranges from How to backpack to Type 1 diabetes.
Regards
*Keith Old
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Major problem I see: The name of the author is given on each article along with a brief description of their qualifications/position. This is good. Some authors have "verified" under their name, however it turns out that that only means their name has been verified, not their qualifications [1]. Some articles have references and other links to confirm things, so it's not completely unreliable, but the "verified" statement is seriously misleading. I don't care what someone's name is, I care about their qualifications. It should be made clearer that only the name has been checked.
1. http://knol.google.com/k/knol-help/name-verification-faq/3vd571esbn0f5/1#
... and high Google rankings are guaranteed! :)
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Knol Stuff mail@knolstuff.ning.com Date: Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 12:31 AM Subject: On Knol Stuff : Google Knol is Open to the Public! To: "anirudhsbh@gmail.com" anirudhsbh@gmail.com
A message to all members of Knol Stuff
Google Knol is Open to the Public! http://knol.google.com Start blogging and writing content on knolstuff.com and your stories will be high in the seach ranking!!!!
Visit Knol Stuff at: http://knolstuff.ning.com
-- To control which emails you receive on Knol Stuff , go to: http://knolstuff.ning.com/profiles/profile/emailSettings
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 6:43 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Major problem I see: The name of the author is given on each article along with a brief description of their qualifications/position. This is good. Some authors have "verified" under their name, however it turns out that that only means their name has been verified, not their qualifications [1]. Some articles have references and other links to confirm things, so it's not completely unreliable, but the "verified" statement is seriously misleading. I don't care what someone's name is, I care about their qualifications. It should be made clearer that only the name has been checked.
http://knol.google.com/k/knol-help/name-verification-faq/3vd571esbn0f5/1#
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
http://knolstuff.com/profile/HiTLER
With such high-quality contributors, what could possibly go wrong?
Magnus
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Anirudh Bhati anirudhsbh@gmail.com wrote:
... and high Google rankings are guaranteed! :)
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Knol Stuff mail@knolstuff.ning.com Date: Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 12:31 AM Subject: On Knol Stuff : Google Knol is Open to the Public! To: "anirudhsbh@gmail.com" anirudhsbh@gmail.com
A message to all members of Knol Stuff
Google Knol is Open to the Public! http://knol.google.com Start blogging and writing content on knolstuff.com and your stories will be high in the seach ranking!!!!
Visit Knol Stuff at: http://knolstuff.ning.com
-- To control which emails you receive on Knol Stuff , go to: http://knolstuff.ning.com/profiles/profile/emailSettings
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 6:43 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
Major problem I see: The name of the author is given on each article along with a brief description of their qualifications/position. This is good. Some authors have "verified" under their name, however it turns out that that only means their name has been verified, not their qualifications [1]. Some articles have references and other links to confirm things, so it's not completely unreliable, but the "verified" statement is seriously misleading. I don't care what someone's name is, I care about their qualifications. It should be made clearer that only the name has been checked.
http://knol.google.com/k/knol-help/name-verification-faq/3vd571esbn0f5/1#
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
I think I'm probably missing some elements of how Knol works... Anyone can create their own version of an article about something? And only pagerank and the starred rating determines which you see first? Won't they have an impossible noise problem?
Also, how do they deal with crap like this: http://knol.google.com/k/graham-colditz-md-drph/cancer-prevention/bzml3lSg/S... "Eight Ways To Prevent Cancer"? The article they've got on squamous cell carcinoma, for instance - lots of junk in it that we wouldn't normally include, so generally speaking I'd say its beneath FA standards. On the other hand, it beats the hell out of our article on the subject. [1][2]
Lastly, whats the import of the Creative Commons license they use? The articles I've seen are all CC-BY 3.0 - we can reuse content under that license, can't we?
1. http://knol.google.com/k/bryan-cho/squamous-cell-carcinoma-of-the-skin/VCa6d... 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squamous_cell_carcinoma
Interestingly, also - the content policy is already full of license questions, and even a short thread about BLPs (using standard Wikipedia terminology, as well, and the most recent commenter is Lar). I wonder how many of the Knol writers will be Wikipedians? Maybe the biggest issue Wikipedia will have with Knol is that they draw from the same finite crowd of contributors.
Nathan
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
I think I'm probably missing some elements of how Knol works... Anyone can create their own version of an article about something? And only pagerank and the starred rating determines which you see first? Won't they have an impossible noise problem?
Also, how do they deal with crap like this: http://knol.google.com/k/graham-colditz-md-drph/cancer-prevention/bzml3lSg/S... "Eight Ways To Prevent Cancer"? The article they've got on squamous cell carcinoma, for instance - lots of junk in it that we wouldn't normally include, so generally speaking I'd say its beneath FA standards. On the other hand, it beats the hell out of our article on the subject. [1][2]
Lastly, whats the import of the Creative Commons license they use? The articles I've seen are all CC-BY 3.0 - we can reuse content under that license, can't we?
http://knol.google.com/k/bryan-cho/squamous-cell-carcinoma-of-the-skin/VCa6d... 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squamous_cell_carcinoma _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Knol isn't Google's answer to Wikipedia - it's Google's answer to Geocities (or whatever the free hosting site of the day is). With stacks of editorialised articles in parallel, the goal and product are totally different. Of course, Google's answers are usually good, but this is only being compared to Wikipedia because Wikipedia's popular, not because Wikipedia's similar.
WilyD
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
I think I'm probably missing some elements of how Knol works... Anyone can create their own version of an article about something? And only pagerank and the starred rating determines which you see first? Won't they have an impossible noise problem?
Also, how do they deal with crap like this: http://knol.google.com/k/graham-colditz-md-drph/cancer-prevention/bzml3lSg/S... "Eight Ways To Prevent Cancer"?
Sorting through noise is exactly what made Google famous, and what they do best. Lack of signal might be a problem, but I don't think noise will be.
Lastly, whats the import of the Creative Commons license they use? The articles I've seen are all CC-BY 3.0 - we can reuse content under that license, can't we?
Sure, as long as you follow the license.