Some days ago I listened to this interview with Larry Sanger: https://tuckercarlson.com/tucker-show-larry-sanger He is obviously very right in all his Wikipedia takes, but the solutions proposed are a waste of time, mostly because they will never be implemented, and it's the wrong focus to try to get the Wikipedia overlords to appease reasonableness, we should be building a decentralized encyclopedia instead. There was one really good proposal, though: he suggested that Wikipedia should allow more than one article for each topic to be created, since there may be different viewpoints about that same topic and it's better to let them speak independently than to try to reconcile them in the same article. That solution suffers from an analogous problem to this: Basically there is no way in practice for a single organization to decide how many articles will be created about each topic and what viewpoints are worth being represented, and then moderate the content inside each different article. A much better solution is to create an ecosystem of articles where anyone can publish, and then the tools for people to curate and point to their preferred ones, such that naturally the different viewpoints will be clustered around some articles curated by individuals with relative trust and no absolute authority. Readers would benefit enormously by being able to navigate between these different viewpoints and judge everything by themselves.