Certainly one of the problems of a wiki is that authority is decentralized and information can be added by people who don't know what they are talking about, but I really think the format is helpful; when I was very new, I didn't know what I didn't know, so it was hard to form specific queries. The interlinking of pages, letting you wander through the game information in a website, is really useful, and made the game accessible to me when it otherwise wasn't.
Is there some kind of senior editor or moderator of CrawlWiki? My suggestion would be:
1 - to draw a hard line between fact-based articles, which would require code-reference as proof (the way people sometimes post in the forum, and the way other encyclopedic sources usually work), versus strategic suggestion articles, which should have a person's name attached to them rather than just "XYZ guide".
2 - version the articles as suggested above, because while some information is wrong, some just changes quickly. I don't think this needs to be done in trunk, or at least not with every little update. Perhaps just major releases?
3 - have certain reliable people take "ownership" over moderation of certain groups of pages by "watching" them and rolling back inappropriate edits. this already happens very frequently.
4 - more rigorous editing guidelines in general, and some elaboration of the "meta editing" articles to help people learn to contribute effectively
I've made edits here and there where I've been able to add something to the wiki for fix issues, but I don't feel like I have the right to go and reorganize the whole thing. I'd be happy to help whoever runs the thing to do some of the grunt work though.
(Also, I was unaware that there were more factually accurate sources!
)