And, to continue on my train of thought from the last message, it's a real shame that the main critical sites are like that; I genuinely see a lot of good in the idea of an independent, critical-minded site that keeps watch on Wikipedia, holds it up to criticism where warranted and ridicule when it deserves it, and makes constructive commentary about what its problems are and how they might be solved. There's even a place for forums on which people banned from Wikipedia can have their say and explain why they think their ban was unjust. And it's good that there are places to talk about Wikipedia that aren't controlled by the same people who run Wikipedia itself, so that those in power aren't able to completely remove all checks and balances on the exertion of that power, by suppressing criticism whenever it hits close to home.
It's just too bad that the places where this sort of thing can take place end up getting dominated by unconstructive criticism along the lines of "Wikipedia is evil and must be destroyed!" (an actual thread subject on WR recently).