Gerrit wrote:

There is a problem with the Alexander Hamilton story. The problem cannot be solved 100% in a wiki. We can lessen the problem with validation and other techniques, though.

I think on occasion the Wikipedia community makes the mistake of elevating the "wiki" aspect of Wikipedia to the level of ideology. A wiki is merely a technology. It is a means to an end, not an end in itself. The end goal here is to create a free, accurate, comprehensive encyclopedia. The wiki aspect of Wikipedia has enabled it to move rapidly in what is generally the right direction, but in the process of doing so, the wiki notion that "anyone can edit any article" has been adjusted already in various ways: sysops, soft and hard bans, arbitration, and so forth. If need be, the wiki rules could be adjusted further. For example, there is no reason in theory why Wikipedia couldn't hire the entire staff of Encyclopedia Brittanica to oversee fact-checking and quality control. Or, we could work in a way of "blessing" certain versions of articles (meaning that the blessed version has been certified by an appropriate expert).

I'm not saying that either of these steps is necessary or appropriate at this time. The point is that the Wikipedia doesn't have to rely on "some unspecified quasi-Darwinian process" to assure that its content meets quality standards. We can specify any process we want, Darwinian or otherwise.

--Sheldon Rampton