If the top "scandals" in the article are considered reasons to change, just wait until the alt-crew get a hold of wikipedia. Medical, political, science, educat

If the top "scandals" in the article are considered reasons to change, just wait until the alt-crew get a hold of wikipedia. Medical, political, science, education, religion discussions would all be even more crazy when people can point to some wiki gospel as proof. We'd find the list of scandals grows a thousandfold. Wikipedia is amazing, if imperfect. Make it better, don't try to break it by splintering it into some weird "whatever you think is right" solution. That's already what we have in social media. Truth is already federated enough. Edit: what would convince me more is some demonstration article/cluster of articles and maybe some math proof that shows how this is better, through faster convergence on truth, defence against rando's etc. I think even getting a definition of "better" would be a bit of a battle!