> Frankly that sounds like a great task for editors that aren't subject experts. I disagree. Hunting citations doesn't take specialized knowledge, but it does

> Frankly that sounds like a great task for editors that aren't subject experts. I disagree. Hunting citations doesn't take specialized knowledge, but it does take time. I doubt that the ratio of editors to article churn would sustain them being responsible for hunting citations. I think that's really the core of most issues with wikipedia: neither side has the time. Individual contributors don't have the dedicated time to comply with all quality-control policies themselves, and editors are spread too thin to provide any feedback beyond quoting chapter and verse.