Since anyone can easily edit Wikipedia, how is it that good (and usually accurate) content emerges?

At this point in time, I do not think that I will ever be involved in updating or tracking Wikipedia updates. To me, my beliefs and thoughts are something that I will discuss with friends or among friendly conversation, but I have no intention of trying to get my beliefs or ideas documented into a global forum. I do not want to spend time updating a definition that others can delete, nor do I want to try and argue with someone why my thoughts should stay in the context of the definition. Frankly, there are other ways that I’d rather spend my time.

Nevertheless, I do see the benefit that Wikipedia provides and although I do not directly pull up the site to find the meaning of a topic, I will navigate to the site if a search result pops up through my Google Search (which it typically will as the first result). After reading the Wikipedia post my question is usually answered. I realize that reading the information could be inaccurate because of the ability for anyone to modify a definition, but I have never found myself to have been mislead by Wikipedia content. Part of that reason is that I wouldn’t know if I was being mislead or not since I’m having to look something up in the first place.

I think the fact that Wikipedia is able to maintain accurate information even though it can be edited by anyone is very intriguing. Part of the reason for its accuracy is that there is an administrator monitoring pages. This person is likely to have some knowledge on the subject and is able to determine whether or not a change is completely irrational. This person has the ability to remove comments or even the whole post. There are also people that handle disuptes. Secondly, the people that are going to invest the time and effort into making changes, tracking those changes, defending those changes will be passionate about defining something. Those are people that see value in sharing their thoughts about a topic. Some may see the participation as a way to stay current in their fields, be able to use the activity as a means to progress professionally, or may even be a way for someone that has a great passion for a topic, but is not directly involved professionally in that arena, have input into the given field/industry/specialty.  Whatever the reason and motivation, the people making modifications are able to track what happens to the post, make comments, suggestions, and re-edit to make it read to their liking.

There is an emotional connection that editors with Wikipedia, whether it is defending their name/thoughts or ensuring that people around the world have up to date data. While the source may not be considered a legitimate source in the research industry, whatever the connection between the editors/monitors may be, that is what makes Wikipedia successful as a trusted source of information for the everyday Internet searcher.