Google has finally released to the public their Knol reference tool to the public after a 7 month development process. Intended to be a sort of internet encyclopedia, Knol will be filled with articles written by experts in every possible type of field.
Sounds like Wikipedia, doesn’t it?
The major difference between Knol and Wikipedia is that Knol will require submitters to identify themselves. This means that readers of the Knol can then assess the credibility of the information through independent verification, before using it as a reference. Google will not screen submissions, but rely on search rankings to determine if an article is credible or not.
This one difference may make Knol more valuable, in the long-run, than Wikipedia. Wikipedia has long had a reputation of being so submitter-driven, without any sort of verification process or way to double-check the credibility of information published, that it is often not allowed to be used as a valid reference. At most, Wikipedia is a jumping off point to further information.
I am glad to see some sort of competition come online for Wikipedia. As I work with students on a daily basis, I have to explain often that Wikipedia entries alone are not enough to base a paper on; there has to be substantiating information. Knol, with its open references to the authors of the article, along with their credentials, has the potential to be a much more credible source, and therefore make it into mainstream bibliographies, than Wikipedia ever will.