For many people it's obvious Wikipedia has already so heavily poisoned the well that having a competitor come along can only create cleaner and purer water for the whole community.
[who?][citation needed]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template%3AWho
Having standards for this stuff matters even if you don't always like the result.[0]
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Word...
>> "Weasel words are words and phrases aimed at creating an impression that something specific and meaningful has been said, when in fact only a vague or ambiguous claim has been communicated. A common form of weasel wording is through vague attribution, where a statement is dressed with authority, yet has no substantial basis. Phrases such as those above present the appearance of support for statements but can deny the reader the opportunity to assess the source of the viewpoint. They may disguise a biased view. Claims about what people say, think, feel, or believe, and what has been shown, demonstrated, or proved should be clearly attributed."
Go to grokipedia.com and look at the edit log yourself. It's two clicks. If you care about truth you'll do it.