Wikipedia, biased, incompetent volunteers, and taken over by business

a reply to: werewolf99

It all and always comes down to boosting exposure for advertisement and marketability to target audiences.
You'd be surprised by the infinite tricks websites do to gain followers and notability. Then again, maybe you wouldn't be. . .

It strikes me that part of the problem is that wikipedia has become more about fame than achievement and that a person who hasn't appeared much on television but with terrific achievement won't get in, whereas a person who while not famous but with a few television appearances on good shows and no achievement will get immediate inclusion. Wikipedia is unfortunately edited by people who have little knowledge of the subjects they edit. But most of all it has become a place where those that decide whether new pages and stuff should be included or not are people who use their job on wikipedia to give themselves pretend status, which obviously works against the true worth of it as an encyclopedia.

To be brutally honest I only use wikipedia to get a General Idea/feel on any given topic. I'll often check the references/sources listed on the bottom of their pages for more in depth details or supporting facts. If I cannot cross references it with other corroborating sources I'll take the whole of info with a massive grain of salt.

So far they've seem to be fairly accurate on many topics of my interests.