In my view, this all boils down to the fact that if Google hosts the
information, it means they can display adverts. Google presently makes money
off of Wikipedia because the broad coverage of topics increases the
proportion of queries that Google can potentially show advertisements for,
which represents an increase in the capacity of the market. Even better than
that would be for Google to host the information that constitutes the long
tail of Wikipedia. Not only can adverts be purchased next to the results for
these topics, but if Google is the number one result, which they will be
(they emphasize in the blog post that "we are quite experienced with ranking
web pages"), they also get to show advertisements next to the result that is
clicked on in the event that the advertisement shown next to that result is
not clicked on. This is an increase in impressions, and the larger the
number of impressions, the greater the chance that one of them will be
converted. Even better for Google is when a surfer clicks an advertisement
in a Knol article which lands them on a page displaying Google ads,
which.... you see where this is going...:)
On Dec 14, 2007 4:24 PM, Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)fairpoint.net> wrote:
I'm having trouble wrapping my head around this whole deal.
Can anyone explain to me exactly how Wikipedia could or would use a
Creative Commons'd knol?
Suppose that a knol were written about some topic for which Wikipedia
only had a stub. Then, if I understand the licensing of a "by" license
correctly, the article could be cut and pasted from the knol into a WP
article, and presumably wikified, and then become a normal article.
Is that right?
And if it is, anyone can do this, not the original author of the
article? How and where would the citation to the original article be
integrated into Wikipedia? Isn't it the case that Wikipedia could
integrate more or less all of the content from Knols?
(I imagine there is documentation somewhere on Help: for how to
integrate content from the various free licenses into Wikipedia, but I
hope some will agree that the discussion is worth having in this
We hope to move to a Creative Commons license. Whether what we end up with
is compatible with Knol or Citzendium depends on what license they chose.
Ideally, we should all work together so that all these licenses are
compatible. There is nothing any of us do that can't be improved on.
As a footnote, any open source license selected by the original creator of
an article is acceptable on Wikinfo.
Wikipedia-l mailing list