There are plenty of high quality sources, but I don’t work for free. If you want me to produce an encyclopedia using my professional expertise, I’m happy to do it, but it’s a massive undertaking that I expect to be compensated for.

Your doubts are irrelevant. Just spend some time fact checking random articles and you will quickly verify for yourself how many inaccuracies are allowed to remain uncorrected for years.

With all due respect, Wikipedia’s accuracy is incredibly variable. Some articles might be better than others, but a huge number of them (large enough to shatter confidence in the platform as a whole) contain factual errors and undisguised editorial biases.

I’m a doctor of classical philology and most of the articles on ancient languages, texts, history contain errors. I haven’t made a list of those articles because the lesson I took from the experience was simply never to use Wikipedia.

This, but for Wikipedia.

Edit: Ironically, the down votes are really driving home the point in the OP. When you aren’t an expert in a subject, you’re incapable of recognizing the flaws in someone’s discussion, whether it’s an LLM or Wikipedia. Just like the GPT bros defending the LLM’s inaccuracies because they lack the knowledge to recognize them, we’ve got Wiki bros defending Wikipedia’s inaccuracies because they lack the knowledge to recognize them. At the end of the day, neither one is a reliable source for information.

I too have read David Foster Wallace/Ernest Hemingway/Virginia Woolf

If you wanna be pedantic, Italian pasta is actually the knockoff of Chinese noodles.

Also, Greek food is fantastic!