I think this has to be solved culturally. Wikipedia would have to have a radical cultural dedication against "cliques" and sectarianism and towards openness. I

I think this has to be solved culturally. Wikipedia would have to have a radical cultural dedication against "cliques" and sectarianism and towards openness. I also don't like the maxime of Wikipedia to prefer "sourced" information, rather than "true" information. Something can be wrong, but if reputable sources claim it, then it goes in WP. I know in the English speaking world the term "truth" has gotten some problematic connotations recently, but frankly I find that disturbung. I really would prefer a site that goes for the truth, and when there is no agreement then I want them to detail the disagreement (with correct proportions to prevent "false balance") and then I want to discuss the fuck out. I feel in Wikipedia, too often the "admins" (i.e. the established editors) decide on a whim. Finally I think deletionism is the plaque, and we need an inclusionist wikipedia. This is not just because I want to read articles about Pokemon, or because I believe disk space is cheap. I personally think there is a fundamental philosophical or political argument pro inclusionism.