In a message dated 11/30/2005 1:07:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, chris@starglade.org writes:

I've now started removing any additions to pages I have on my watchlist which I do not think are common knowledge and have no source for the claims, and I have asked contributors to cite where they are getting this information from.

I didnt want to get into this debate, but this kind of reaction worries me no less than the problematic article itself.

Yes, the article was problematic, but it was one in 850,000. Yes, there may be other problematic articles out there (in fact, I am convinced that there are), but their number is miniscule as compared to most articles.

The problem article, and the ensuing press coverage, should be an eye-opener to everyone. Rather than just worry about quantity (the number of articles, or the number of edits), we should be worrying to the same degree, if not more, about quality (how comprehensive, how accurate). Of course, this is much more difficult to measure, but that is what will ensure that Wikipedia is a high quality reference work. Deleting material because it is not yet sourced will not ensure that.

Let's take advantage of this challenge to really improve our quality. Let's not use it to take apart the efforts of many thousands of well-intentioned volunteers who added what they knew. If we do that, the vandals have won.

Danny