It is pretty amusing to see such a mediatised example of how wikis tagged as web 2.0 are good for fun systems but not for anything important. Allowing anyone to add, edit or delete content is just asking for trouble when the document is of any real importance. While Wikipedia was in its infancy period there were fewer users and issues. Once Wikipedia received ample media coverage they closed down most open functions that allow just anyone to edit content.
This is funny when you see that Wikipedia is often used as an example to differentiate so called web 2.0 systems from web 1.0 sites. It just goes to show that there are far fewer differences than web 2.0 advocates would let you believe, when you compare valid and established systems that don't waste endless hours of editors' time.
This is a snapshot of what the 'defaced' page looked like (clicking on the image, gives you a larger view of the lower part) :
Post A Comment About This Article