I take issue with Rob Lightner's claim: "Wikipedia has moved past its controversial beginnings to become an established, even respected, free source of information for everyone." I think Wikipedia is as controversial as ever, and it is becoming less and less respected because:

(a) The University of Minnesota proved that content on Wikipedia is becoming more and more likely to be damaged, over time.

(b) Wikipedia's new registered editors who make more than 10 edits are in decline.

© New administrators of the site are in decline.

The tips here reflect a view that the tools would be interesting to a wide audience, when in fact, the desire to pull Wikipedia edits into a Google Reader would probably be appealing to less than 1% of the Internet-active population.

I know I sound like a pessimist, but I believe I speak for many when I say we're getting tired of trite, "rah-rah" stories about how wonderful Wikipedia is. It's not wonderful, and it's in decay.