>>805296Yeah. Wikipedia should at the very least reflect the current consensus among historians (which can be wrong like in any scientific institution but that's not wikipedia's job to judge that) but sometimes articles are protected from improvements to shape political narratives using outdated research and works. For example see the use of Robert Conquest for the holomodor article. Humanities also get too much leeway in general in terms of sources allowed.
And of course for current events the majority of sources used are the billionaire owned media which creates its own bias. But otherwise I think people are unfair to wikipedia it's probably the best website on internet and generally it does way more good than harm by providing a huge amount of easily understandable knowledge to any prole with an internet connection.