"Can Wikipedia Ever Make the Grade?"

I have frequently gone to Wikipedia for information. While in college, many professors have advised against taking any information obtained from the site as credible; however, it has always been a great place to get at least the "basics" of a topic. Although I have never used Wikipedia as a "source" in bibliographies for research papers, it is usually the first site I go to to get information that lays the groundwork for the topic I plan on researching.
I think that "Dr. al-Halawi's" test on Wikipedia was brilliant. What better way to find out if the site is credible than to post information that you know is false and monitor how long it takes before the information is deleted, or if it is even deleted at all. However, in agreement with the article, although the false information was deleted within a few hours, what about the surfers who absorbed that false information during those few hours? There is no way to inform that the information was invalid.
While many professors and others with doctorates in particular fields may be encouraged to contribute to the contents of the site, one may still question whether they will because of financial factors. Is there any compensation for these educated people who may or may not contribute? If so, the percentage may raise, if not, what motivation do they have when there are several scholarly journals who are willing to compensate them for their troubles in research.
Overall, while most of the information posted on Wikipedia may be valid, it still should not be considered a reliable source because of it's openness to the public. Because anyone can post whatever they choose -- even if it only stays up for a few hours-- one should not rely solely on Wikipedia for information. In my own research, however, I will continue to consider it a preliminary source as I begin research.