Here's an interesting observation (well, part observation, part theory): The more Wikipedia is cited on forums whose members include various subject matter experts, the better Wikipedia becomes.

Huh? Come again?

What happens is this: I see a thread I'm interested in. I read through it, and notice a post that's "not quite right."

Now, "not quite right" posts can range from "all but 1% is 'not quite right'" meaning "it's 99% trash," to "it's just about perfect, except for one little thing." Regardless, this covers about 99.9994736% of all posts here on Baut, so you know what I'm about to tell you applies to just about everything ever posted here on Baut.

So anyway, there I was, reading this thread on Baut, when I notice that it's "not quite right." Being a subject matter expert on the particular subject in question, I picked up on that fact somewhat readily, and proceeded to Wikipedia, both for confirmation, and for the fact that Wikipedia has gotten a lot better at sourcing their content, thereby avoiding the weak, "Because Mugs said so" justification for my response.

As I'm reading through the Wikipedia article, I notice that it also contains some mistakes. Argh! So I first correct Wikipedia (citing my sources - always have to cite your sources!) before referencing the Wikipedia article here on Baut.

Then it hit me, and I wondered just how many others did that, not only here on Baut, but on the many thousands of other forums dealing with all of Wikipedia's myriads of topics. More importantly, what sort of an effect would this have on Wikipedia's content as a whole? If it's anything like what I've experienced, a fair amount. Even when I'm perusing a Wikipedia article about something in which I am most certainly not a subject matter expert, I still run into glaring errors in grammar, or poorly worded statements. Both are ridiculously easy to fix. So, I fix them.

So the first mechanism is when subject matter experts use Wikipedia as a source (because it's widely accepted by the masses), and discover errors, which they fix.

The second mechanism is when the masses quote Wikipedia as a source, a subject matter expert reads it, says to him/herself, "What???" then fixes the erroneous material.

Either way, Wikipedia is improved.

__________________
If I set the budget, we'd have Ares and more. Unfortunately, I don't set the budget, and Ares is just too expensive and too far out for us to accomplish our goals within the budget we were given.

If we halt the ISS, all versions of Ares, and transport Orion and Altair aboard DIRECTv3's Jupiter family of Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicles, we just might make it back to the Moon by 2020.