I agree with the first part entirely, Ed. Wikipedia cannot be treated as a standard as it is based both on shaky foundation (any body can contribute to it though no one knows the qualifications of the contributor!) and structure (no one knows the qualifications of people who edit the submitted content. In fact such editorship is quite arbitrary). It is best to call it “marketpedia,” that is, information collected from market.It is like asking some one for directions in a town square and he can, and often does, give wrong directions. The same applies to wikipedia.