Here's a letter published in the Economist QUOTE
WikiTweaks
SIR – Your take on the charges of elitism at Wikipedia struck a chord (“Wikipleadiaâ€, January 15th). I have been a contributor since the summer of 2009, mostly to articles on race issues, and during this time I’ve seen several members quit the project. Every person I know of who has left provided the same reason, which is that Wikipedia’s rules are enforced selectively, especially the rule that members treat each other in a civil manner. One person said he had been accused of being a “nationalistâ€, a “racistâ€, a “POV-warriorâ€, a “trollâ€, a “conspiratorâ€, a “sockpuppet†and a “meatpuppetâ€.
The basic problem is that without a system of checks and balances, Wikipedia cannot ensure that people who hold minority viewpoints are treated fairly. Although Jimmy Wales is still the titular head, nearly all decisions about individual disputes are made either by the community, by administrators who are elected by a vote in the community, or by a group of high-level administrators known as ArbCom, who are also elected. The surest way for administrators and ArbCom to retain their positions is to appeal to popular sentiment among the ordinary members. By doing so they drive away members who might have voted against them.
This self-sustaining cycle of bias, the decline in participation and Mr Wales’s gradual delegation of authority to the community and to ArbCom have all occurred since 2007. He now needs to introduce fundamental reform to the way Wikipedia’s community is managed.
Jonathan Kane
Belle Mead, New Jersey