Wikis are websites to develop content collaboratively. The question arises to what extent the reputation of participants influences the quality of wiki sites. We analyze the impact of author reputation using the example of Wikipedia. We extend previous research by considering a set of different reputation metrics and a new model for aggregating reputation values. Since anonymous authors tend to have a lower reputation, we also quantify the level of participation of anonymous authors as an indicator for the reputation of the crowd. Our analysis finds out that reputation matters, but strongly depends on the used reputation metric and therefore on the corresponding author characteristics. The study shows that the experience of authors in the development of high-quality articles is highly relevant whereas the number of edits and the quality of contributions are of lower importance. Finally, our investigation proves the open editing model and the self-healing mechanism of wikis.