Perfect, they are so bad that professors and teachers refuse to accept them as a source. That they have a history of false entries.<quoted text>
Then you're posting in the wrong place. If you don't like what ANYone says on Wiki, then you should try to develop a TINY bit of courage, sign on there & tell them EXACTLY how they're wrong. If you have facts & logic on your side, in the small-D democratic environment of Wiki, you'll prevail. Period.
I reference Wiki because it's usually pretty accessible, plus they have lots of live links to reputable sources. Are they perfect? Of course not. But they're a LOT more accurate than the average site out there. The fact that so many people can input their own knowledge tends to push the site toward the truth.
So you're talking to the wrong guy in the wrong place. Either post on Wiki & tell them exactly HOW they're wrong - or SU.
You might also show a BIT more respect by learning how to spell proper names. It's "Wikipedia" & "William Connolley."
The fact that so many can input could push it to the truth but it can and has pushed it the other way. If you look at the numbers you would discover that Wikipedia has become static in the number and type of those who contribute. Similar in demographics and even views which is not a receipe for accuracy.
Of course if you don't believe me then ask Wikipedia.