LINK: Journalist's search for counter arguments damages science
I just saw this link on a pop-news site. It's a PDF file showing how good BBC's reporting of science news is in general, but more specifically it reports about the fact that the journalists give far too much credit to arguments from people who have no scientific backing for their argument. http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/our_work/science_impartiality/science_impartiality.pdf
I think the rules surrounding the wiki pages should be made more clear and strict. I suggest we use the same rules as wikipedia but with some twists, the main difference being that posts on lesswrong itself count as valid links to reference/quote from in wiki articles. Also we might want to consider now allowing downvoted posts to be used.
Other than that we might want to use a queuing system where a page maintainer reviews changes made and gives karma for accepted changes. At some point you might also consider removing karma for bad changes.
This maintainer thing does not have to mean we don't instantly see the change. The review can be done after the fact or they can be queued and not be made visible until reviewed.