This article by POPSCI's reporter
When I told Jay Walsh about the back-and-forth regarding climate change, he said, "It doesn't surprise me to hear that. Climate change is a bastard--it's one of those really complicated topics within Wikipedia, because the [editors] are so science-focused." But he wasn't upset that one point of view had been steamrollered on a Wikipedia page that received more than half a million hits in three days--he was intrigued about how the process went, and about how it was eventually ironed out, in a way. "The article doesn't not do its work because of that," he said. Walsh talked about a "good faith" versus "bad faith" edit: Ken Mampel really thinks he is improving that page by eliminating an unclear passage about climate change, so that's a "good faith" edit. Which, for Wikipedians, means the system is working. But what about for those 500,000 readers who didn't get the full story?
Wikipedia article traffic statistics link in the middle of the paragraph, I use this tool several times a day and I know you will find it interesting to play around with too. Just make sure that the name you insert in the search box is exactly the name on the page you want to look up. Also you can see the hit count for different languages (again you have to put the name exactly as it is on that other language page)
So if you want to help out with the Guerrilla Skepticism on Wikipedia project, please contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org. You don't have to be an expert on anything, I need doers more than I need experts. I do train.