Knol is a google beta site quite similar to a Wiki – but gets its ‘authority’ by identifying authors – hence their qualification to write the article with opportunities for critique /comments ect ect..
I remember in Uni back in early 2000′s we were discouraged from using the net as a research resource. We were not allowed to quote any information from internet sites because of the questionable authority, and if we needed to get an Research Article for Psychology we had to go to Sydney Uni, and look up their entire collection of abstracts on a on site database, ( after booking the time on the PC ) then go hunting through rooms and rooms of dusty articles to pull out the journal we needed. It was a pain. Now you can download PDF’s of published journals.
Schools are also now encouraging students to Wiki things – but to always look at the information you get with a grain of salt.
Is Knol to be the acedemic – be all to end all – authority on anything and everything, to add creditability to the multitudes of opinions and thoughts that float on the interweb From their FAQ “So the Knol project is a platform for sharing information, with multiple cues that help you evaluate the quality and veracity of information.”
Knol is relevant to Warcraft because – There is nothing on there yet about it…
I did a few warcraft related searches and found nadda. There are a lot of health related articles though..
So What can you write about…. Almost anything you like.
QUICK! – Some of the entries I have read on the wow blogosphere have been amazingly researched, theory crafted, calculated – and that makes you an expert. So get cracking..
Warcraft already has some amazing Wikis and reference sites and crawlers.. Will Knol be a benefit to Gamers? Specifically to Warcraft ? I don’t think so Wikipedia never did , because it was too ‘mainstream’ and some of Wiki’s rules around what is ‘allowed’ to have an article didn’t cover the intricacies that gamers want. But maybe Knol does as there doesn’t seem to be a restriction of what or who is of note enough to get an article.
Does Knol have the potential to be the ultimate authoritarian on anything? Is the information on a Knol more correct then a Wiki? Both have audience feedback abilities, but in the case of Knol the readers can’t edit, only refute it.
“Google does not monitor or edit the content of knols, and takes no responsibility for such content.”
I just am not sure “Knol it.. ” will be as popular as “Wiki it.. ”
Knol doesn’t seem aimed at specific communities or interest groups, but if it doesn’t open its doors ( or Knol’s ) to non mainstream content it potentially will evolve into something else just by the content that is submitted Eg A Medical Reference site.
A ‘qualification’ to write an article is not really defined, but education, by experience, hobby all theoretically makes you qualified,
But of note and I applaud Google for this.. as I have recently been looking at the some of the shonky T&C’s as to some Photography competitions from organisations that want to fill their stock photos for free.. - When it comes to Knol..
Your Intellectual Property Rights.
5.1. No Google Ownership of User Content
So My prediction for Knol is it will not become mainstream popular - That while it may end up being recognised on the net as a ‘wiki’ equivalent for medical, Health, Science, Technology , Pychology , basically any Field of acedemia ect ect… as those fields are more likely to attract people who have paper qualifications, hence more implied authority as to what they write. There are however, already specific Wikis aimed at those people who are interested in those fields, with various levels of authenticity. I also don’t think that the majority of the content will be original and written specifically for Knol. Its more likely to be a replication of another source.