Does knowledge need to be true??

It is said that in order to know something, that something needs to be truthful. Yet, at what level does this knowledge need to be true, does it need to be absolutely true, or can it be an absolute lie? I beleive that there does need to be some truth but it does not have to be absolute truth. I beleive that in order for something to be considered knowledge, you have to have a level of beleif to it, to have some sort of justification to say that you know something, and to have some truth. For this truth, I beleive that it does not neccesarly have to be true but one has to beleive that it is true. For example someone may be able to say that they know something, believing that it is true, but without being informed it is infact a lie. Therefore one may not need truth to say that they know something, but as long as they beleive that they know something is true, then it is a level of truth and therfore can be considered knowledge.

Plato's Ideals on Knowledge.

Plato always found himself questioning knowledge and other peoples knowledge too. I believe that Platos decision to question everything he thought he could know, except for that he knows nothing, that Plato would find himself lost. If I would start questioning why or how or if anything is true i would start to wounder if i was real or if anything i thought i knew was real. I would then find myself lost in a web of confusion and questions.
Plato's idea of ideal templates in which are why we know what something is, I beleive is a good idea when it comes to inanimate objects, but when it comes to other objects, I don't see this theory to fit. For I believe that when it comes to them that we learn about these annimate objects by preception, not by a template. And when Plato says that people know how to identify an object because they know the template before they are expoaed to this object seems ubsurd. For if that is the case then why don't children know what all objects are without teaching, or why does a blind person not know how to relate when a seeing individual dercribes an object they have not been in contact with. For these reasons I beleive that Plato was wrong with his ideas when it comes to anything other than science and math, or other such inannimate objects.