My motivation for posting this video is to help show that WikiPedia was corrupted as an information source by those who have money and resources long ago. It's the same thing that is now happening to Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Reddit.

I agree there are technical/scientific articles that are decent references and/or can get you pointed in the right direction. I certainly use those.

True, people do not check sources. Seems that often when I check source links in a WikiPedia article, they often aren't even on the web anymore. People now don't even read more than fits on their dumb phone's screen. The lack of critical thinking and lack of desire to search for alternative points of view or accounts is a problem. By only listening to and accepting the information that is given to you by an "authoritative" source, you forfeit your own sovereignty.

I do not think that WikiPedia's issues are simply from too many cooks in the kitchen. Some of those cooks are there to make sure the meal does or does not turn out in certain ways.

While most people do realize that WikiPedia is not the source of all things true, they may not realize what information they may not be clued into. They also may not realize that Wikipedia can be used in character assassination, such as in the Phillip Cross Affair.

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/05/the-philip-cross-affair/

This matters because, an ordinary reader who comes across an article questioning (say) the official narrative on the Skripals, is very likely to turn to Wikipedia to get information on the author of the article. Simply put, the purpose of the “Philip Cross” operation is to make certain that if that reader looks up an anti-war person such as John Pilger, they will conclude they are thoroughly unreliable and untrustworthy, whereas if they look up a right wing MSM journalist, they will conclude they are a paragon of virtue and entirely to be trusted.