Lichtenstein also expressed concern about the anonymity of Wikipedia's many "editors and administrators", which may also mean consumers are unable to establish the credibility, or otherwise, of an author.

According to Lichtenstein, Wikipedia topics are selected for inclusion on the basis of their notability, which is subjective and fosters discrimination and elitism, "the very things the Wikipedia is against".

"Unlike academic journals and other legitimate reference sources, the Wikipedia has created new and anonymous elite 'editors' and administrators," she said.

"An expert is held accountable if they make a mistake but no one is held accountable for the information available on Wikipedia. People miss the statistical likelihood that a doctor will give you a wrong diagnosis compared with Wikipedia. And people may never be able to tie back false information they use to Wikipedia."

Lichtenstein warns that if teachers, employers and academics continue to accept Wikipedia as a legitimate reference, the valuable knowledge of experts will become increasingly disputed and marginalized, and inferior knowledge will be learned and applied in the workplace.

"There have been many incidents when a version of a Wikipedia article can be very inaccurate, which could be innocent or the result of deliberate changing of an article," she said, adding there are certain political views, particularly conservative, that are not tolerated on Wikipedia.

Lichtenstein said as a result of growing dissatisfaction with Wikipedia's editorial process people are starting to develop niche online encyclopedias, including Google which plans to release "Knol" for user-generated content.

"Google Knol is supposed to be a competitor to Wikipedia that will involve experts, and because it's Google, search results will appear above Wikipedia entries which are quite often the first result," she said.