I'm not sure I like the idea of Wikipedia being reusable for commercial purposes. I'd rather the whole encyclopedia were CC-BY-SA-NC or something, if that's feasible for a work with multiple authors that change over time.
I'm strongly opposed to the idea that articles can ever be finished, yet the feeling that featured articles, Wikipedia 1.0, and stable versions are a Good Thing is so widespread it's just taken for granted without opposition.
I feel strongly that allowing content under a "fair use" claim is directly contradictory to Wikipedia's stated aim of being a free content encyclopedia. Moreover, it's unnecessary. I have never seen a single "fair use" image that was actually needed in the article where it was used.
I feel like the vandalism is increasing faster than we can catch up with it.
I feel like the "fanboy" articles on comic strips, computer/video games, professional wrestlers, and the like are taking over, while articles on topics of actual historical, cultural, or scientific value are languishing. The biggest problem with the fanboy articles is that they are predominantly original research, yet they are so well established that they will never be deleted on those grounds. Descriptions of fictional characters' personalities and behavior are based entirely on what editors themselves have observed, not on published sources.
Postscript: Writing a few years later now, my ideal would be for Wikipedia to permit articles only on topics that exist in the real world. For fiction, this means articles on the books/movies/comic strips/games themselves would be acceptable, but articles on the fictional people/places/paraphernalia inside them would not be.
There are many articles with misspelled names whose "protectors" refuse to allow them to be moved to the correct spelling. Instead of having an article on, for example, the city of Meißen, we just have a redirect to the fictitious city of "Meissen". And it's not only places: we have articles on the nonexistent people Ilham Aliyev and Franz Josef Strauss, but no article on the president of Azerbaijan, İlham Əliyev, or on the German politician Franz Josef Strauß.
Schools are, by definition, nonnotable. The only school worth having an encyclopedia article about is Eton College; it's the exception that proves the rule. Yet it has become impossible to rid Wikipedia of a whole range of worthless articles on schools.
I'm getting fed up with the nationalist bickering among Eastern Europeans here. Whether it's the Poles vs. the Lithuanians, the Slovaks vs. the Hungarians, the Serbs vs. the Albanians, the Greeks vs. the Macedonians, the Belarusians vs. the Belarusians, or any other pairing, I'm sick of it. It's getting to the point where I don't feel I can trust anyone east of a rather zigzag line running from Szczecin to Trieste to be able to write from the neutral POV.
