Wikipedia-bashing is much to common. The potential problems with a site like Wikipedia are glaringly obvious. The concrete benefit of having Wikipedia is equally obvious. When faced with a choice between potential problems and concrete benefits I go with the benefits. But of course that only works as long as the process works, and the recent story of repeated lies and no consequences for the liar - with the lies uses explicitly in promoting Wikipedias trustworthiness seems to me to be the first case of something truly broken. "I don't have a problem with that" wasn't really the answer we were looking for.
Seth Finkelsteins pull out quote from a letter intended to specifically but an academic at ease about Wikipedias trustworthiness is particularly grotesque.