Well it looks like I’m not the only one confused about this part so I’m just gonna roll with it and I’ll edit this once I get some clarification from Dr. Coats.
Can Wikipedia lead to #valid_research?
Is #Wikipedia a #valid_source?
Can #open_editing be used for good?
Will #anonymous_editing lead to trouble?
Can Wikipedia bring #universal_knowledge?
Is Wikipedia a #platform_of_research?
How can Wikipedia lead #students to #answers?
The KahnQuest 
This is going to be a great project. For now I can tell you that debating the relative merits of wikipedia as a resource aid is less interesting to me than demonstrating why wikipedia can provide types of learning other, more static, less webby resources cannot — besides, if you can accomplish the latter, the former is also accomplished, so best to aim higher. Also keep in mind that the primary text (wikipedia wars) should appear in the inquiry project too, but I have a few ideas about how you might accomplish this, so do not panic. I’ve been promising a few students now that I will write up a blog post to clarify how the digital primary text, dreamer readings, and outside research will come together in the final inquiry project — hopefully I will post that this evening after I get the next week’s pages of my poetry class together. More soon,
Thank you! I agree that discussing how Wikipedia can be used is the way to go, but I’m a little nervous about finding research to support that. It seems more of a “this is what I think and here’s why” sort of thing. I’ll have to find a way to tie in Wikipedia Wars, which may be difficult considering it’s a concept I virtually created. I look forward to the post that will tell us how to tie this all together!