Mostly it's about recentism. Wikipedia, as all encyclopedias, is usually very good for stuff that doesn't change frequently or in large amounts. But there is a

Mostly it's about recentism. Wikipedia, as all encyclopedias, is usually very good for stuff that doesn't change frequently or in large amounts. But there is a continuing problem with recent and current events. You get a lot of people trying to produce a single article, and disputes occur. One example: the Amanda Knox article spent literally years in a slow-moving and entrenched edit war (which nearly gave me a hernia trying to unpick) over whether she was guilty or not - all of which was up in the air due to pending court cases. As soon as the case died down and tied up, the article instantly became a dead zone and is mostly OK.