This arguably dysfunctional community is extremely off-putting to some of the most potentially valuable contributors, namely, academics. Furthermore, there is no special place for academics, so that they can contribute in a way they feel comfortable with. As a result, it seems likely that the project will never escape its amateurism. Indeed, one might say that Wikipedia is committed to amateurism. In an encyclopedia, there’s something wrong with that.
Read Wikipedia and its ‘bad seed’: Is Web 2.0 a friend of true knowledge? from ZDNet. Previously from WNM: Are wikis a poor man’s peer review, or the natural home for new research?
Update: Wikia launches semi-private university wikis from Ars