QUOTE(John Limey @ Thu 18th March 2010, 1:29am)
The theory that Wikipedia has good content but bad editors is entirely incoherent.
In a real business or organization, some people become stale and are moved around to freshen them up; some people go bad and are fired. That can't, in the first place, and doesn't, in the second, really happen on the Pee-dia.
So the idea of a clean start of admins, and the exclusion of many classes of editor, is attractive ... but what would attract the right kind of material to produce a good Encyclopedia?
Like the man says, only money invested in qualifications.
As Churchill would have said, "It has been said that Wikipedia is the worst form of free encyclopedias created by unpaid volunteers except all the others that have been tried."
I was interested to see that
Reuters.com had adopted the Mediawiki software for their journalist's handbook.