Show n Tell A question for It may seem an odd question to WP purists but considering the importance WP places on reliability of secondary sources why does WP not require a same or similar vetting process of its editors particularly those who seem to speak only for themselves The entire concept of requiring contributors to discuss argue with a username is absurd in its most basic interpretation For all I know I could be spinning my wheels fighting for accuracy with a demented mind game playing geek living in inner Mongolia It is imperative in my mind that those who demand respect offer up some sort of evidence as I have of their actual ability credibility reliability accountability their authority to control If it s required of the sources it should certainly be required of those who quote them and write about them Similarly how do I call for consensus Who may be a member and how is each identified Thanks in advance That s the beauty of Wikipedia Anyone can edit it That s the point You have no more authority than any other editor here regardless of your credentials Also anyone can participate when trying to achieve consensus Just remember it s not the number of people but the strength or the arguments that matter darian