"There is no formal peer review on Wikipedia, but in my opinion, less formal crowd sourcing has proven effective in creating a remarkably useful free reference work. Many of the references cited in Wikipedia articles on academic topics are peer reviewed. Good Wikipedia articles will summarize what a wide range of experts say on a topic. A Wikipedia article should be considered an introductory overview of a topic, and serious students should delve much more deeply into what truly reliable sources say about a topic." - Jim Heaphy, Wikipedia administrator

This is my experience with Wikipedia (a good starting point for research, but only one of many sources required to confirm facts).
A good example (counterpoint to "5G and coronavirus"):
Re:
https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/9/21214 ... s-internet
"None of the conspiracy theories that try to link 5G and the coronavirus even make sense. The virus is spreading in countries without access to 5G, the frequencies from 5G can’t harm your body, and COVID-19 is caused by a contagious virus that is in no way related to electromagnetic waves. Even the general correlation between 5G and COVID-19 doesn’t stand up to scrutiny: they’re both global phenomena happening at roughly the same time, but as soon as you look at specific countries, the correlation falls apart."
Rod
