Seems @Eden and a few dozen of his colleagues are realizing this idea. I applaud the effort and would argue for tighter integration of that site here in the Level1 Tech domain.
Without eyeballs, wikis simply die. Here, in close proximity to the Discourse-based forum, that starvation of eyeballs is less likely to happen, especially if the wiki is a top-level navigation sibling of the Discourse forum.
That said, however, I do not feel that the Discourse message board itself is an apt format for articles. It has been designed for conversation - a time-series of thoughts that spring off what was written before and serve as a springboard for the next thoughts. Discourse, the software underlying this forum, is well-designed for that sort of thing, and that sort of thing may very well be the genesis for ideas for articles as prospective material is examined, evaluated, dropped or retained. But at the end of the day, ideas for articles ≠ articles.
The latter is a more sustained form of presentation that suffers from the turmoil of discourse. Comments intrude with trains of thoughts. The trains of thoughts themselves are prototypes for more solid thinking. Articles don't sit well in discourse, even though the prototyping work often does.
Ward Cunningham makes a nice distinction between Thread Mode and Pattern Mode writing. Discourse, the message board environment, is well suited for the banging-on about article ideas - thread mode. But at the end of the day, when some participants of the discussion spy the glean of an article in the serial discourse, they need a repository for the Pattern Mode refactoring of the discourse - a wiki. And the wiki has to be There and not About To Be There.
So there. I think a wiki is a necessary prerequisite so that this ambition has a proper container at the end of the day when the caterpillars of thoughts about articles morph into decently cross-linked articles - the butterflies realized.