Thank God the comments section of this ridiculous article are open and unmoderated. I just truthed it up a bit.
This article is essentially drivel because it presumes that all of the nefarious editing on Wikipedia that gets caught, gets caught quickly. What about the experience of Wikipedia Review on Wikipedia? I've had over a dozen clients who have paid me to edit Wikipedia, ever since July 2006. Only three of my efforts have ever been rebuffed by Wikipedia. Over ten new articles have stayed in place, completely unmolested by the Wikipedia "authorities", because I've learned exactly how to subvert the system. My forthcoming book, will reveal many of my secrets.
The arguments that take place on Wikipedia generally do NOT reflect what society at large is arguing about. Arguments on Wikipedia typically center on things like whether or not the article about Crisco should include references about the product being a preferred lubricant of those who enjoy anal fisting. I kid you not.
When will a conference about Wikipedia actually wake up and see the truth about Wikipedia?