Wikipedia: "A Work in Progress" (BusinessWeek article)
This article is a well-done piece of the recent troubles at
Wikipedia but I recommend it for some of its comments. One of my favs:
“If lies were published in "Who's Who" (an anonymously authored work) how and when would Seigenthaler have had them corrected, assuming the author were malicious? Perhaps never. With Wikipedia, he could easily have corrected it himself in a minute. You just click on the "edit" button, delete the offending sentence, and save. Much scholarship has always been collective and anonymous. Wikipedia is not new in this respect. Anonymous and permanent--like your FBI file--that is dangerous. Anonymous and amendable instantly, that is pretty much harmless. Could S. sue? I think not, given the ease with which the slander or libel can be erased by the alleged victim. The most vociferous critics of Wikipedia seem to be the people who have been banned from editing it. Many of the rest are threatened by a rival who is "giving it away free," namely, fatuous, gullible journalists and academic bibliography stuffers.”

