Wikipedia is getting very awkward - it is clear that some articles are 100% propaganda, while others appear to have honest insight into world events. I guess i

Wikipedia is getting very awkward - it is clear that some articles are 100% propaganda, while others appear to have honest insight into world events. I guess it's good to break the habit of thinking that history (like AP US History) can be read in an "unfiltered" way, but without something like a comprehensive database of every single Wikipedia edit, with tools to help detect bias (example: CIA wants to edit an article) Wikipedia will become a victim in the information arms race. In this particular case, I think statistics can reverse the obvious "tragedy of the commons" situation with Wikipedia. For example: tools to help with associating edits / edit conspiracy / sockpuppet detection