Wikipedia is by no means at fault in this. It provided exactly what it said it would provide: a community edited encyclopedia. Take it for what you will, but it won't be 100% right 100% of the time. The reporter for the Guardian is the one who bungled this completely. "All of us" know better than to take a "fact" from Wikipedia and use it in what is supposed to be a vetted source of information.
No.
Wikipedia is by no means at fault in this. It provided exactly what it said it would provide: a community edited encyclopedia. Take it for what you will, but it won't be 100% right 100% of the time. The reporter for the Guardian is the one who bungled this completely. "All of us" know better than to take a "fact" from Wikipedia and use it in what is supposed to be a vetted source of information.