The internet needs a way to help people separate rumour from real science, says the creator of the World Wide Web.

BBC News

He is founding a Foundation to rate web sites. How will they rate Wikipedia?

Not well, me thinks. Despite the honest efforts of many people trying to ensure it doesn't, Wikipedia maintains way too much crap to be seen as anything other than a threat.

That article is just one of many that form a current zeitgeist that Reviewers need to wise up to. In the past, we've had threads carrying the views of Richard Dawkins, Andrew Keen and others, who each in their way have grappled with the problems Berners-Lee highlights here; the Erosion of Knowledge, and also Wikipedia's role in that process.

With the rise of the anti-evolution candidate Sarah Palin in the US, the head of The Royal Society advocating teaching creationism in UK schools last week, and Global Warming Skeptics still at large regurgitating falsehoods, now is not the time for people to be learning their facts from a Leviathan as irresponsibly managed as Wikipedia.

Problem is that truth is pretty subjective when it comes to being a universal arbiter of something like that.

I know what I believe to be true, which is generally along pretty mainstream lines, but I can't claim it all to be absolute and undeniable 'truth'.

It's the nub of the whole ID cabal and WP:FRINGE crisis on WP - people are going to any lengths to maintain their 'truth' - ends can't always justify means.

I am currently working at the SBC, the Small Bogon Collider. I'm trying to build a new tool, the SBD, the Small Bogon Decider, to sort information from disinformation and disinfotainment.

I have to agree with Kato, if this quote from Berners-Lee is any indication: