The Wikipedia has a number of entries for various complexity classes. I generally find them for the most part accurate but not complete. Take for example the NL entry which doesn't note that NL is closed under complement but instead has the misleading result that RL=NL (where one allows the randomized machine to have infinite computation paths). Sure I could fix the entry in wikipedia but there are at least two problems:
- There aren't enough people in the field who have the time and patience to go through all the entries and update them.
- I firmly believe RL should be what Wikipedia calls RLP. But what right do I have to impose my naming conventions on the whole wikipedia universe.
Don't give "theorymatters.org" as an example to a place that ignores area X. It's a Wiki - if you don't add the material yourself no one will do it for you.But people are reluctant, for whatever the reason, to edit the wiki. Outside of the "Survey Collection" you can nearly count the number of contributors to the wiki on one hand.
In short wikis, like anything else on the web, can be a good source of information but are often incomplete sometimes in important ways. Just because anyone can edit a wiki doesn't mean that they do.