A neat exercise for anyone who thinks Wikipedia isn't a useful reference is to pick ten random subjects from Encyclopedia Britannica and see how many of them have an article in Wikipedia. (Answer is most likely "all of them".) Then do the opposite:
Space Flight Operations Center (in wiki but not E.B.)
Hypertrocta (in wiki but not E.B.)
Sokół motorcycles (in wiki but not E.B.)
Paradeudorix petersi (in wiki but not E.B.)
Bella Voce (in wiki but not E.B.)
...and so on...
Now there is a certain amount of vandalism, rumor, political skew, etc. so you should take what you read in Wikipedia with a grain of salt, but at least it's there. Most of the time it will point you to a more authoritative source in case you think someone's being deceptive about Osage oranges.
Space Flight Operations Center (in wiki but not E.B.) Hypertrocta (in wiki but not E.B.) Sokół motorcycles (in wiki but not E.B.) Paradeudorix petersi (in wiki but not E.B.) Bella Voce (in wiki but not E.B.) ...and so on...
Now there is a certain amount of vandalism, rumor, political skew, etc. so you should take what you read in Wikipedia with a grain of salt, but at least it's there. Most of the time it will point you to a more authoritative source in case you think someone's being deceptive about Osage oranges.