WebUser, a UK-based Internet magazine, reports that Wikipedia now has more than 1 million articles in its database. Wikipedia has been the focus of some controversy over its value as an authoritative source of information, particularly for journalists. For more on this, see Mark Glaser’s column, “Collaborative Conundrum: Do Wikis Have a Place in the Newsroom?” in the Online Journalism Review. (Not that journalism has all that sparkling a reputation for accuracy these days.)

Wikipedia’s founder, Jimmy Wales, insists that all articles are peer-reviewed in real time, noting, “The idea of sharing knowledge is powerful.” Indeed it is, and one day, using wiki software, it may produce 100% credible content, too.

The debate is probably premature. Like blogs, wikis are so new that these issues haven’t had a chance to shake out. The fact that the Wikipedia owners haven’t caught minor inaccurate changes deliberately made to obscure articles is indicative of nothing. If, however, the same problems persist a decade from now, we’ll know that wikis cannot stand up to scrutiny and shouldn’t be used by journalists. I suspect that it won’t be an issue.

Whatever the argument, some 2,500 new articles are being added to Wikipedia every day and 25,000 articles are updated in 100 languages. The credibility issue may still be hanging, but the question of whether people will freely share their knowledge without compensation has been answered.