Mathias-
when I read your mail, it reminded me on the typical
reactions of some
people who did not know wikipedia and heard about writing an encylopedia
bye allowing anyone to post :)
Actually, there's a key difference. We have a "no original research"
requirement on Wikipedia for exactly the reason that we can't rely on
original research by anonymous contributors (also, because it goes beyond
the scope of an encyclopedia).
Controversial information in Wikipedia has to backed up with sources and
citations. Anyone can provide a citation, it doesn't matter whether they
are anonymous as long as the source is obtainable and can be verified by
others.
For a real news service, original research is of course essential, and for
original research to be credible, there have to be reputation and
accountability attached to it. One of the worst mistakes we can make is to
treat wiki as a dogma. Wikis should be the basis of all Wikimedia
projects, but the exact parameters in terms of policy and technology
should be varied depending on the individual project needs.
Regards,
Erik