Is wikipedia.org Safe?

BACKEND RECOVER @ RESCUE TEAM . COM services are one of a kind. I came across their contact in my search for help recovering my stolen coin, and it was helpful. I invested $50,000 worth of coins with Coin-Flip 3 months ago but they ripped me off the return of investment and the investment capital as well. Thanks to the rescue team for recovering my money back. You can use their help should you find yourself in a similar situation.

What was conceived as a magnificent goal, a free library of humanity-valuable information that anyone can faithfully edit, is unfortunately marred by site owner biases, resulting in an unacceptable amount of articles that, taken on their own and with no other information, result in misleading conclusions and obvious biases. For just one of thousands of examples, "The Last of Us Part II", though widely regarded by audiences as being inferior to its predecessor and having a non-Metacritic-altered Metacritic user score below 5/10, is stated as having "universal acclaim" from critics with this severe audience rating barely mentioned and dismissed as "review bombing", even though the score was still non-positive after MetaCritic removed review bomb ratings (evidence: https://web.archive.org/web/20211117171403/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_of_Us_Part_II). Further numerous and concrete examples of "Wikipedia bias" can easily be found with an online search. Wikipedia is (like some of your school teachers may have stated), not a valid objective source, and should not be relied on by itself for accurate information. Reading its content by itself will provide an inaccurate picture of real world events, definitions, people, and places. It is a shame to see what could have been such a valuable database of information, corrupted by personal site-owner biases that a true scholar would absolutely never copy into their work.