How trustworthy is the information in Wikipedia (WP)? This question is important for all WP users. Since March 13, 2007, this experiment conducts a long-range test to help answer this question.Ensuing discussion, when the conditions are right, should converge the result to a much better version, even better than the original editor could have done under best efforts. "Misteakes are a catalyst for the power of collaboration."As an important side benefit, this should provide a concrete editing benefit to WP and online content in general, including avoidance and handling of "fake news."
As we often see, the more one tries to explain about truth and/or assert what is true, the further one usually departs from consensus.
The reason is that truth is subjective and subjectivity is truth; as each person affirms their own subjectivity more, they become more defensive, more inwardly drawn, and their positions move farther apart from a middle position.
However, how about "logical truth"? As Tarski defined, "Snow is white is true iff Snow is white." This definition is useful for making truth intersubjective. "Logical truth is that which is true because it works." And, what works might be independently verified, by friend or foe.
With a bit more work, can we make truth objective?
That is, if an assertion is intersubjectively true for more and more people, can it eventually become objective? Markets are such a construction.
The short answer is yes.
With this book, begins the longer answer.