Wikipedia was never truly open and it has always had a bias despite it's "NPV" rule.
This was never more clear than when I tried to remove gratuitous pornography on an article. The power-structure imposed their will and locked the article with the porn included (after a restore to what it was prior to my edit).
Wikipedia is not "Neutral Point of View" instead it is very slanted toward an anti-conservative, anti-religion, anti-family point of view.
In no way is it an encyclopedia as an encyclopedia is for children to use to have a well-thought-out introduction into a topic.
Wikipedia enforces a thinly veiled campaign against: religion, traditional family values, capitalism, and other values and beliefs which makes it completely inappropriate for use in education.
It would not surprise me that the vast majority of schools block access to Wikipedia.
MVT's comments on Nicholas Carr's about the ''death of the Wikipedia Spirit'' were spot on, IMHO. Actually, the comments to Carr's post were quite insightful, on average.
Carr has posted a follow-up about what he perceives to be the ''Wikipedia myth'' (not that the term ''myth'' is that appropriate here, but who cares?).
http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/05/now_lets_bury_t.php
Comments on this follow-up? Who died, in the end? Wikipedia the system, Wikipedia the ideal, some people's fascination with Wikipedia, or Carr's WikiCred?
Chowhound
Comic Vine
GameFAQs
GameSpot
Giant Bomb
TechRepublic