I used to revert vandalism on Wikipedia (hence the name), but have come to realize that the idea of a publicly editable encyclopedia is inherently flawed and a complete waste of time.
Information here cannot be relied upon; any information gathered from wikipedia MUST be verified, since much of it is incorrect, misinterpreted from the original source, or, my favorite, complete fabrications. (If you want proof, get some real encyclopedias and compare) Further, while incorrect information is often accepted here, facts are often deleted by over-zealous editors who waste the time they could use to correct real errors.
Simply put, readers should expect Wikipedia articles to be incomplete and/or incorrect. Sadly, many readers will remain unaware of wiki's many flaws (see: its editors) and continue to be duped.
"Notable criticisms include that its open nature makes it unauthoritative and unreliable (see Reliability of Wikipedia), that it exhibits systemic bias, and that its group dynamics hinder its goals." from criticism_of_wikipedia
/rant
