Last week Google launched Knol, its Wikipedia-wannabe site, with a sparse base of knowledge. The online encyclopedia has millions of words to go before it catches up with the hundreds of thousands of international entries in Wikipedia’s storehouse of human knowledge.
But some critics maintain that a few of Knol’s features may give Wikipedia some much-needed competition.
Who’s on Knol?
Unlike Wikipedia entries, Knol entry contributors must assign their names to the articles they contribute. Readers can then make a decision whether the named author is indeed trustworthy. Authors can be checked out online — or off — to determine if they have the credibility needed.
While some studies show most of Wikipedia’s entries rival print-encyclopedia accuracy, the site has been marred by political and personal squabbles. For example, Wikipedia entries concerning Chinese government oppression and Iranian capital punishment have gone missing in the past — deleted or severely altered by unknown editors.
In the United States, political candidates say their Wikipedia entries have been edited with some bias and sometimes contain outright erroneous information. Anonymous online edit wars can ebb back and forth — made possible, say some analysts, by the anonymous nature of the contributors.
By assigning author names and ownership to articles, Knol hopes to drastically reduce bias, edit wars and false information. In addition, attributing authorship to articles may have the salient effect of attracting more credible sources for information. After all, what academics or experts don’t want to see their names in print, even if it’s in an online encyclopedia?
By default, the Knol site assigns what is known as “common code attribution” to all articles. This means articles found on Knol are governed by the rules of the Creative Commons Attribution license. Under terms of the CC, users of Knol articles can share the content and/or…