en.wikipedia.org é seguro?

I`m glad that we have such a great base of resources, available for free. Whenever I have some stupid questions or find out comprehensive information about something, wiki is here. I still can`t understand, why they don`t charge anything for their service, it`s hard to imagine, world that required to make these articles. Yes, the academia professors don` t consider this source, as reliable way to get some info for some report and so on, but I`ve never faced any crucial mistakes or uncredibility. This is the rare thing to get something valuable for free these days

a big source of knowledge for me, even though I tried to double check all info coming from this resource. it's an open-source one, so to speak. anyone can enter it and edit information that will be proved later on. there were situations when some info given in the article was misleading and it caused certain troubles for people. still i continue trusting wikipedia. it's my favorite place to read about unique people, companies, places and so on. just wish them further development!

Biased sources full of fallacies, half-truths, and fallacies used when it comes to histrorical and political entries. So-called Wikipedians, with a clear political agenda to undermine national sovereignty of nations, are at work to ensure their partial narrative is upheld. I have stopped contributing to Wikipedia due to their dysfunctional regulations barring revision and auditing of flawed monographs/entries using credible secondary sources.

Wikipedia tries to stay impartial except on articles on politics and religion. It's biased in favor of the West over East, non-Muslim Left Wings over non-Muslim right wings, Muslim right wings over Muslim left wings, Abrahamic religions over non-Abrahamic religions but other 2 communities over Jews