I graduated with a Master of Library Science degree from the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at Simmons College in May 2013 with a concentration in Archives Management. I currently work as a Programmer Analyst with a specialization in database UI optimization. I am a casual wiki-gardener, so I apologize for any etiquette I neglect in editing.
I am noticing a tendency on wikipedia which is alarming. The vast majority of editors believe what they do is a social good, they contribute because they believe knowledge is power. There is an aggressive minority of self-proclaimed experts who delete or refute articles and arbitrarily decide the value of a citation or whether it is necessary or not. This is problematic because it discredits the former group. It makes the idea of information dissemination hostile, or meant only for "experts." While I believe that, yes, experts ought to be shaping and influencing their own craft, a certain amount of transparency is necessary- hence why doctoral candidates must defend their research in a forum. I believe that what I do and say here ought to reflect that. If something is not sourced, knock on my door here and I will gladly work harder. If something is confusing, by all means correct it. I have no ownership of knowledge, but it can appear as though I am territorial when I come into contact with those who do claim ownership of ideas.
It's a recklessly evil idea.