While looking into blogs this week, I came across Knol, a project undertaken by Google to create what will basically be a more academic form of wikipedia, comparable to scholarpedia. This will be a wiki that will be available for posting by invitation only, as the intent is to have the articles written by experts in various topics and areas writing the posts, with other people denied access to edit to their specific page without their permission.
I find it interesting to have found out that there have been professors that ban their students fom utilizing wikipedia and google for their research, which is evidence of cultural norms in the practice of research and academia. It will be interesting to view Knol upon its completion, and to see what the response is from the academic world about this as form of knowledge acquisition.
For some more information about Knol, you can visit these sites:
Official Google blog - http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/12/encouraging-people-to-contribute.html
Unofficial Google blog - http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/2007/12/google-knol-encyclopedia-written-by.html
"Rival wikipedia" - http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/digitalcontent/2007/12/googles_plans_to_rival_wikiped.html
For a quick wikipedia reference to Scholarpedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scholarpedia
4 comments:
This is interesting because sites like Wikipedia and Google are large examples of what our generation wants: fast and convenient information. With a website like this, that will be quick and simple, yet supply all information that is submitted by experts, it sounds like an amazing website!
While I'm admittedly something of a Google Evangelist (see the Google Calendar I made for this class), this is one idea I'm not certain I'm 100% behind. It kind of undermines the "social" idea of the Web.
I feel like if I find the phrase "ALL NAZIS ARE BASTARDS" in the middle of an article on Wikipedia, I'm smart enough to know that it isn't supposed to be in there.
I have to say that I agree with both Jenna and Eric on this one. While having sites like Wilipedia and Google make everyone's lives a little easier, I'm not sure if I'm really into the exclusivity of this. I'm not sure that limiting who can submit information guarantees that the information will be accurate and relevant. And it's a sad thing to have to point out that while we understand situations like Eric describes, there are plenty of people out there who think that any info on Wikipedia is the utmost truth.
Post a Comment