I have encountered a great many occasions where wikipedia can answer the question. Spot on. Mostly, I re-write (i.e., condense, extract, clarify, find more appropriate articles) the wiki page into an answer, get a few +1s and everyone is happy. I have seen quite a few arguments against wikipedia, including that it is written at a pretty high level. I think I agree on that. But more importantly, often the wikis are extremely lengthy; a trained scientist quickly sifts through the bladibla and hits target, while the poster may not be able to do that without getting lost in all the info. I have been there. Or, the wiki articles are simply too short. Hence, I think converting wiki's into answers is not so bad. Especially considering that, e.g., people working as computer scientists on a BioMed program may be totally confused by definitions. Anyway.
My question: should questions be put on hold as being answerable by "see wiki" ? If yes, I may have to increase my answering threshold.