I'm getting some mixed messages in this thread alone. Who do I believe?

https://imgur.com/a/ylkWLfQ

I recommend reading the wiki and judging for yourself.

When I contributed a binary QR code decoding feature to zbar and the new version landed in the arch repositories, the first thing I did was edit the arch wiki with usage information.

I also documented a process for encoding and decoding PGP keys to and from QR codes using that feature by editing the paperkey article on the arch wiki.

When I installed arch on my laptop, I wasn't able to configure my screen's brightness. Searching the arch wiki revealed that by default the kernel's Intel iGPU drivers would set brightness by PWMing the screen which doesn't work over eDP connections which is what my laptop used, and also documented the exact kernel command line option I needed to make it work.

The Arch wiki is the 1st party official place for developers, maintainers, and users to maintain updated reference material. Whether one considers it up to date "enough" will be a personal judgement call but there is no better place to go in the long run.

Not just Arch documentation. It often has general use information, too, applicable to other distros and Unixes.

Agreed! I've never used Arch, but the Arch wiki often comes up in search results when I'm looking to solve a problem, and it's usually very helpful.

Arch has some of the best documentation for Linux in general. I ended up there a lot for a Manjaro install but it has solved issues on Ubuntu machines for me. Always pretty obscure stuff.

The duality of linux distributions

The worse the installer the better the documentation.

It's a joke, but perhaps there may be a core of truth in there. An underlying psychological process at play.

ArchWiki: your source for Linux documentation :)

Outside of the pacman part (relevant to Arch only) the "how to configure your app" is wonderful.

This is really a fantastic documentation