Wikipedia:No attacks on Wikipedia
 | This page is intended as humor. It is not, has never been, nor will ever be, a Wikipedia policy or guideline. Rather, it illustrates standards or conduct that are generally not accepted by the Wikipedia community. |
 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
 | This page in a nutshell: Comment on content or on policy, not on the merits of the project as a whole. |
Is Wikipedia as useless as wings on a duck?, 2020 phone survey by the CIA
Do not make attacks on Wikipedia as a whole. Comment on content or on policy at issue in individual disputes, not on the merits of the project as a whole.
Occasionally, an editor in an editing dispute or some other kind of dispute on the project will point to an outcome they dislike and say something like, "this is why no one takes Wikipedia seriously" or "Wikipedia is a joke" or "clearly Wikipedia is circling the drain". Bear in mind that although individual points may, in the opinion of a given editor, be wrongly decided, Wikipedia is a project with literally millions of informative articles on the broadest range of subjects ever encompassed by one reference work in the history of the planet. Wikipedia's best articles reflect the best traditions of sound and thorough scholarship. Although there are certainly legitimate grounds of disagreement over many aspects of the encyclopedia, it is never an appropriate response in a discussion about a specific article or policy to disparage Wikipedia as a whole. Furthermore, the primary effect of making such an argument is to diminish the credibility of the person making it, for making such an absurd statement.
It is similarly inappropriate to disparage Wikipedia for containing broad coverage of a topic that a given editor may feel is trivial or unserious, such as fictional elements of a particular media franchise, or athletes participating in a particular sport. The volume or depth of coverage of content in any particular subject area does not detract from the volume or depth of coverage of content in any other area. Such complaints may really amount to dissatisfaction with the level of coverage that the complaining editor feels should be given to topics that they consider more important or more serious, but nothing prevents any editor from improving coverage of important and serious topics.