Can the Germans fix Wikipedia?
The wikipedia vandalism problem has pushed the model nearer to the point of restricting access to expert authors in a given area–a point that would make it like a regular encyclopedia.
From what I can tell, the system allows anyone (or perhaps logged in users) to edit a page, but then a “trusted” or “experienced” user reviews the changes and makes them live.
This change makes perfect sense.
Technically, it sounds a lot like Slashdot’s moderation system or Google’s PageRank (TM) system. Outside of the technological realm, it sounds quite a bit like how review works in publication or even the newsroom. Institutions (whether commercial or nonprofit) have a number of inherent factors which ensure content quality. Review processes, history, reputation, legal liability, and internal debate are all things which restrict institutional speech from being completely uninhibited. By mirroring this, in it’s own way, Wikipedia stands to potentially become more reputable while still capitalizing on the benefits of worldwide collaborative editing.