Yeah, I don't get it either. It's not perfect, but it might be the only web institution that hasn't broken down over time, and has done an impressive job of holding itself to quality standards given the absurdly large scale.
Encyclopedias are, by definition, fairly superficial. You could also sit down and nitpick Britannica. The quality of writing is better because they actually have a professional staff, but they have to make all the same hard choices about what to include and objectivity.
> the only web institution that hasn't broken down over time, and has done an impressive job of holding itself to quality standards given the absurdly large scale.
Internet Archive and Project Gutenberg come to mind. Wikipedia might be an encyclopedia, but those are the libraries.
Encyclopedias are, by definition, fairly superficial. You could also sit down and nitpick Britannica. The quality of writing is better because they actually have a professional staff, but they have to make all the same hard choices about what to include and objectivity.