What Wikipedia says is not the best of arguments, for the simple reason that mathematics articles on Wikipedia have long suffered, as Wikipedia writers themselv

What Wikipedia says is not the best of arguments, for the simple reason that mathematics articles on Wikipedia have long suffered, as Wikipedia writers themselves have argued about for many years, from the problem of diving straight into jargon in the first sentence. It's fairly well-trodden territory by this point, and things are a lot better than they used to be, but part of the tension is between "But one has to understand these other things before one can understand this article anyway." and "An encyclopaedia is read by people who do not understand the subject, because if they understood it they wouldn't be trying to use an encyclopaedia to find out about it.".