No, Wikipedia is no better than any other site which allows user edits and in many ways reliably biased towards certain narratives - which narrative depends on the subject of the Wikipedia article. Wikipedia articles should always be read in conjunction with the Talk and Edit history pages and even then it is necessary to find original sources for any claims made in Wikipedia articles.
why is this downvoted? You call for verification of the claims wikipedia articles serve to us. Don't people agree we should verify info before accepting it?
No, Wikipedia is no better than any other site which allows user edits and in many ways reliably biased towards certain narratives - which narrative depends on the subject of the Wikipedia article. Wikipedia articles should always be read in conjunction with the Talk and Edit history pages and even then it is necessary to find original sources for any claims made in Wikipedia articles.
why is this downvoted? You call for verification of the claims wikipedia articles serve to us. Don't people agree we should verify info before accepting it?