To me is it is also much more important that the 'crowded' peaks, those that get a lot of hits, have the best and most accurate information since there are so many people utilizing them.
Yes, Chad, though we agree on much, I think that is an important area where we don’t necessarily do so. To me, having accurate information is equally important on a well know vs. little known peak and in some cases even more important on the lesser known peak.
For example, if someone botches the (hypothetically; the current page on this mountain is great) page on Mount Whitney, there are many other sources to check, verify and use as a resource.
If a description is botched on a page that is only on SP or has very few other sources, there is no other way to check the information until you do the climb (which is why it is important to be accurate).
I could use my own page that I maintain as an example:
While a prominent landmark, (as far as I know) this page is the only detailed source on Temple Mountain that exists. Unfortunately, part of the information was not correct.
Read the summit logs and comments:
http://www.summitpost.org/temple-mounta ... log/613272
http://www.summitpost.org/temple-mounta ... nts/613272
Because SP was the only place to get the information and because there was an error, it resulted in people underestimating the peak (including Matt Lemke and Josh Lewis whom attempted the climb and are posting in these threads).
When the first person posted the error, I just thought his comfort level was different, but more people started making comments (I should have kept all the corrections; I deleted some) and I adjusted the page.
Very recently I learned that the route had changed and a ledge had fallen away; making the climb much more difficult than in years past.
Given no errors were intentional, but I think it does demonstrate the importance of accurate information on pages for lesser known peaks, and especially on ones where there are few or no other sources to check. Of course, if a peak is a walk up on all sides, it doesn’t matter as much, but on peaks with technical or complicated routes, it is very important.
Anyway, my point is that the voting and page scores are really just nice incentives for the people who make the pages.
Yes, that's what it usually comes down to, but as said above, voting (to me) is supposed to provide quality control and to indicate that pages that need work rather than to make someone feel good.
In the end though, I agree voting is of secondary importance.