QUOTE(dtobias @ Mon 1st March 2010, 2:19pm)
Some of these criticisms you linked aren't all that fair; they're taking Wikipedia to task for insisting on better sources for things that people tried to write about based on their own personal knowledge of the subjects involved; but if somebody managed to get a hoax into Wikipedia by claiming personal knowledge of something that was in fact false, and even worse, pertained to a BLP subject, then the WR crowd would be the first to be screaming bloody murder about how Wikipedia was spreading bad information, and maybe even defamation. It's a no-win situation for the admins who get put into "damned if I do, damned if I don't" situations every time they are confronted with a "keep or delete" choice.
Of course the arguments are not very good. It would not be a better encyclopedia if that group of Usenet dweebs ran it instead of the current group of Usenet dweebs. But the officious prick part is right on the money.