From: "John Vandenberg" jayvdb@gmail.com
Pseudo-science, pseudo-humanities, etc are no stranger to Wikipedia, and our processes have not always been victorious over it. Simply put, the rubbish on Wikipedia outweights the rubbish on CZ, and I suspect that an academically sound study would indicate that, proportionally speaking, Wikipedia pollutes the interweb more than CZ.
I looked at the two following two pages
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Alice_Bailey http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_Bailey
The first of which (the CZ version) is mentioned in the RationalWiki page as an abomination. The CZ version is better. It is still too long for such a silly subject, but minute in comparison to the Wikipedia page, which is endless. So yes, a serious study comparing the "crank quotient" between the two encyclopedias would be interesting. I suspect WP would win (for crankiness, I mean) hands down. I attempted to document some of it here
http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:The_Wikipedia_Point_of_View/Cranks
but gave up, there is just too much. There are whole categories of it http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Theosophical_philosophical_concepts . And don't get me onto the subject of the gurus who are using the project to self-advertise http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Wilber . That gets me very close to what got me banned in the first place. (End of rant, sorry).
Peter