<img alt="" height="1" width="1" />[b]Wikipedia experts wide of the Marc[/b]
News & Star
Wikipedia is the most popular online encyclopedia, even though its tagline – 'the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit' – should be cause for alarm. ...

and more »

View the article

Thank god the critics didn't find any wrong facts about chromium oxidation states.

I will note that the articles in question belong instead to a growing fraction of articles (now > than 1 in every 8) on English WP which are a real problem: BLP stubs and semi-stubs. Most of them on very minor sports and entertainment figures. Yes, edited by IPs who tend to insert junk which isn't always caught. And about figures so obscure that relatively few people look at or care about them.

And no, Wikipedia doesn't give a damn about factual distortion of them. To do so would be to admit that it's a site which has a major systemic problem which is igrowing and remains unaddressed.

For those of you who are interested in the larger problem, BLP stubs seem destined to take over Wikipedia eventually, since society can mint verifiable footballers far faster than scientists can discover new planets of the solar system. In fact, can mint them faster than just about any other class of science of history facts you can think of, with the possible exception of newly-discovered ant or bacterial species-- which in fact for this reason have their own set of wikis.

The system in place on en.wiki is paralyzed, and not able to deal with this.

Hey, Wikipedia! Here's a perennial proposal: that you all pull your heads out of your own rears and FIXIT. As usual, I propose we start a BLP on Wikipedia for anybody who supports the status quo there. And then just let it sit there, as appropriate punishment for the Stupido.