Just a quick question: It seems that we are marking quite a lot of stuff as community wiki. Apparently you earn no rep from community wiki answers, which raises the question of whether it is a good idea to be using CW so much this early. Is this intentional? If so, is this such a good idea while we still have so few users with enough rep to vote to close/open and edit questions?
I'd like to propose the following FAQ statement about CW.
The CW flag should be reserved for questions where you do not believe that there exists one (or even a few) good answers, and where any individual response contributes a small enough piece of the overall answer that no reputation increase is warranted.
CW IS IRREVERSIBLE. When in doubt, DO NOT mark a question CW - this can always be changed later.
Often, a question that seems like it should be CW can be modified to be more direct and focused, thus avoiding the need for the tag. For example, the seemingly CW question "What are the key papers in topic X" can often be reworded as the more focused "What I should start reading when studying topic X". The latter has one or a few definite answers and need not be made CW.
Since this answer will probably need editing, I'm marking it editable.
IMO, we're doing a reasonable job here. The problem about having too few users with power will be resolved soon when we have moderators who will act in the community's interest.
Reputation should be a signal of someone who an expert. Allowing too many open-ended questions could dilute the meaning of reputation on the site.
That being said, I think that many questions which are asked and are totally open-ended, could easily be rephrased in such a way as to be considered a valid question. Putting some research into the question helps, backed by some specifics.