Progress Report 2: Three Guys & a Girl (a.k.a. FourNames)
Wikipedia vs. KNOL (need a more descriptive title)
Authors
Nick Aberle, Trevor Aparicio, Bethany Henrikson, Andrew Fischer
Abstract
Our research for this project is addressing various encyclopedias that are available online (namely Wikipedia, Britannica and KNOL). We are exploring how these environments compare to one another in a meta-design context, specifically focusing on areas related to the coverage and depth of material present on the sites, relevance of material, credibility, and how up to date the material is. Online knowledge bases such as these have a huge impact on society, so we feel it is important to examine them in detail.
Keywords
Wikipedia, KNOL, Britannica, encyclopedia, encyclopedias, meta-design, web 2.0, user participation
Problem / Goal
Our goal is to see how meta-design products such as Wikipedia and KNOL can affect society's knowledge base and what possible implications this can have. It has often been claimed that the information present on these sites is unreliable since it is possible for anyone on the Internet to create and edit pages. We plan on coming to our own conclusion on this topic. There is no doubt that these environments are deeply ingrained in society and it is unfair to address them in a negative context without further exploration.
Methodologies
Our methodologies for performing the research on this project include:
- Reading and analyzing articles on the sites.
- Independent research online
- Reading papers brought up during lectures related to the topic
- Performing experiments on the sites by manipulating articles
- Participating in contributing information to Wikipedia
Related Work
The uniqueness of our contribution lies in the direct comparisons of multiple aspects between similar meta-design encyclopedia sites. Another unique aspect is the manipulation of the content of these sites with the end goal of analysis in mind.
Our project relates to many themes discussed in class this semester. These topics include meta-design, cultures of participation, symmetries of ignorance, and model-authoritative vs. model-democratic.
Characterization of the Individual Contributions
Nick -
Trevor - Helped input ideas for ways in which we can analyze the credibility of the information on Wikipedia. We plan to "sabotage" certain articles in certain ways to determine this. Also, Nick and I have begun work on putting together a Wikipedia article through which we can track its progress as, hopefully, more people contribute to its information. Our idea is that we will create an article about CU's computer science department. We should be able to find enough information about it to at least form a basis for an article. Then hopefully others will contribute to the information and the article will grow.
Bethany -
Andrew - Comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of Wikipedia, KNOL, and Encyclopaedia Britannica based on each of their online websites (not what material they have published in paper or physical-electronic (DVD) format).
Findings and Results so far
Andrew- So far, Wikipedia and Encyclopaedia Britannica appear to be the only comparable sites; KNOL appears to be an oddball. One article on KNOL actually discribed the relationship between KNOL and other online encyclopaedias quite well.
"To conclude that one is better than the other (Wikipedia vs. KNOL) is like saying that a dictionary is better than a thesaurus." -Reginald Patterson, KNOL article writer
Encyclopaedia Britannica is an arcytypal encyclopaedia. It's articles
Wikipedia is a sight that, so far, apears like every encyclopaedia: it has articles that discribe it's entries with tables, maps, pictures and words. It is designed to look and feel like any other encyclopaedia. It's only differance is who it's editors and contributors are.
KNOL is a wonderful of a different kind of knowledge; KNOL is not a database of information, but of viewpoints on the information you wish to know more about. Wikipedia and Encyclopaedia Britannica will give facts; KNOL gives interpretations of those facts. Initally I did not see this as being preferable to strate facts, where I can weigh and ballance fact against fact, but the insight of multiple viewpoints created a new type of information. Not factual information, but a sort of indirect discussion which gave me a better understanding of the facts from other's viewpoints. The potential for problem solving and idea development through KNOL is outstanding.
Further developments planned for the end of the semester
Andrew- Categories of comparison include: website usability, article correctness, article relevancy. Each of these catagories will have a numerical value from 0 to 5 based on sub-catagories, which will also be given a numerical value from 0 to 5. Each score will be accompanied with an explanation of how the score was decided upon. In addition will be an abstraction of each site based on how it caracterizes itself and how it's competition characterizes itself (the "Wikipedia" article on wikipedia will be compared to the "Wikipedia" article on Britannica, and a number of "Wikipedia" articles on KNOL, the same for Britanica, and KNOL)
