Today I was researching on monads and came upon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monad_(functional_programming). After a few minutes I decided to pay a bit of attention to the highly visible warning “This article may be too technical for most readers to understand.” A valuable warning, but easily removable ! It made me think about the quality control in the wikipedia (volunteer-editor) model. The traditional model is the TR (technical review) model, also used in many major news agencies. We can also compare the OSS vs commercial software dev model. SOF(Stackoverflow) is another emerging model of quality control.

The Learn how and when to remove this template message page has some relevant details on quality control.

Q: which individuals have proven expertise + care-taker responsibility over the free content? Note with a lesser-known topic the talent pool shrinks.

In TR model, the “editors” are formally trained (with credentials), individually coached, groomed, watched (by the community), promoted/appointed/elected … over years. Each individual usually has substantial publications in respected media. Affiliation with universities, research institutions and major corporations is a common credential. Compare them to doctors, professors, lawyers.

One level closer to wikipedia model, the committers in a major OSS project are somewhat similar. These committers have to earn their position in the project. No affiliation no publication required. (Commercial software dev model doesn’t have reviewers at all… less relevant to this blogpost.)

One level closer to wikipedia model, SOF model doesn’t designate technical reviewers. I think if you earn enough reputation points, you gain more “editing” power.

In wikipedia model, any child, any crazy person has the same power to edit any page (unless protected). Therefore, we rely on the warning described in the beginning.  So who has power to add or remove the warning? Well, anyone !