I trust that most of us know Wikipedia isn't that reliable: Not even Wikipedia considers Wikipedia a reliable source. However, a lot of people don't realize this, and it is near the top of any search term.
The problems are most severe for articles with few maintaining them. Recently I've gotten a lot of grief at the paraphilic infantilism article, with only three editors active. Two are seeking to promote a fringe theory that infantilism is a type of pedophilia. In academia, this theory is only being forwarded by one facility, CAMH. On Wikipedia, at least one CAMH employee is active, and others may be active. (Most Wiki editors use nicknames, much like here.) CAMH's interests do seem well-connected.
Wikipedia has policies to prevent it from being used to promote fringe theories. However, these too don't work well in articles with few maintaining them. Since I'm outnumbered two to one, there is little that I can do.
Anyway, that is why I am asking. Doing everything I can has taken up a great deal of time. If we don't care what Wikipedia says, especially about us, then it isn't worth the trouble. However, if we do care, then we should get involved.