Compentant but unspectacular USA Today article about Wikipedia. (The focus is on the wiki-addicted editors at the top of the distribution curve. Wikipedia must be climbing a distribution curve of its own to have gotten noticed by the paper.)
Decent but unspectacular Wikipedia article about USA Today.

Speaking of newspapers. Remember the Muhammad cartoons? The article on the newspaper that first published them is now a brilliant and incredibly detailed history stretching back 120 years. (I wonder what the Danish spelling reform of 1948 was. Ah.) Sunlight is the best disinfectant; controversy creates great wikipedia articles (usually. And if you give it some time.).