Here we go again (wikipedia)

[sunnysideup]

Again shoot first and ask questions later. If it can be challenged and removed without anybody providing proof that it is reliable, it should be. Material can always be restored. Tell me, why should material that is potentially misleading remain?

I'm actually pretty amazed on how Wikipedia operates but I guess I shouldn't be. And sure, I have no doubt that there are sources not so handsomely written and should probably be discarded or at least from the Wikipedia page. However I wouldn't feel comfortable myself by rejecting material without actually reading it first. Even if material is supposedly misleading, then I still would like to find out for myself what all the fuss is about. Don't you feel everybody should have a fair chance to make oneself heard? Without people only going by the title and summary? Because to me that is literally judging a book by its cover.