The problem is that it is no longer enough to be a subject-matter expert in order to contribute to Wikipedia. You need also to be a Wikipedia expert so you can navigate the hidden layers of bureaucracy to get a change in.
Many actual experts notice a small mistake, correct it, then watch in amazement as their changes are reverted. Do they know why? No. Do they care why? They shouldn't have to. Most of them never come back, forever diminishing a) the pool of potential contributors and b) the potential total value of the knowledge in Wikipedia.
The entire point of a wiki is minimal drag and minimal upfront commitment. The interface still promises that, but everything that happens after an edit shows that it's just the facade that remains.
Wikipedia plays such a role in today's information access, that leaving it to 'the people' is simply impossible. In the end, Wiki is a powerful media, it's impossible not to acknowledge the potential huge profits of propaganda and advertising. If something is worth having, then it's worth cheating for. Sticking 2 cents into one of the most powerful sources of information on the internet is definitely worth it.
Leaving it to "the people" is the entire point. The entire point.
The hidden layers of wheels within wheels ("Oh, I'm sorry, did you not know to go to /wiki/talk/kafka/machiavelli227-chat, which is nowhere linked to, in order to resolve your issue? Too bad, the matter is closed forever.") are not necessary. It's more about warts developed to deal with internal bunfights than actual problems from actual abusers (which are mostly dealt with sensibly).
