Speaking honestly, I believe you would achieve the same result, if not the better one, without blasting your web 2.0 with wikis.
Have you tried that one also?
Why would not having any wikis be better than having wikis?
I can't speak for this method but the one I use is somewhat similar and I seem to get results for medium competition keywords but not low competition keywords (I find it harder to rank low comp keywords than medium :S)
I do:
main site <-- 12 unique web 2.0 <-- 24 web 2.0 <-- 48 web 2.0
and then all tiers of web 2.0 get wiki, amr, low OBL SB comments and social bookmarks to them.
After that, every wiki and amr link gets big SB and xrumer blast. (I don't ping anything, the content I use is very unique and the index rate is very high on its own. I do notice the link juice takes a lot longer to pass down to my site than when I build smaller linking structures)
I have it pretty much down to a system so the output just go into batch processing files and I run 10-15 of these simultaneously.
For my authority level sites, the first tier goes to high PR quality properties instead of directly to money site.
I'm actually curious to see if wiki does have effect cuz I've been thinking about eliminating wiki/amr layer from my linking plan (I find them annoying to set up and hard to bulk when you have a lot of promotions going on)
EDIT: I've ordered wiki packages (with sb blasts on them) from BHW directly to my aged money sites.. there was absolutely no effect at all (but everyone else on those threads seem to proclaim amazing serp movement, so I don't know)
