Uses of Wikipedia.

Wikipedia has many qualities. It is a useful resource for further information and lots of  the articles have a wide scope of information. The problem with Wikipedia is that it is unreliable. This is for two reasons. 1) None of the articles are attributable to any person or persons, by name or otherwise¹, which means that there is no transparency about the people writing it. 2) The content can be changed whenever.

Wikipedia's main quality is that it allows someone to get started on the initial research into a subject; for getting an (potentially biased) overview before going onto deeper research. Wikipedia allows a path to deep research through  the sources section (usually situated near the bottom of the page) which points you to potentially relevant information for your research, which is sometimes representative, transparent, and therefore more reliable than Wikipedia itself. You should not, under any circumstances, cite Wikipedia as evidence for arguments, it indicates that you have not looked into the subject and are not willing to engage with academic or even non-academic, but representative, sources, such as news media etc, in your research. It is especially dubious if the majority, or only, things you cite in your research are Wikipedia articles. It is sloppy research and nothing else.

Youtube users are especially prone to this kind of sloppy research, they do it in order to create narratives that make them seem informed, when they are merely regurgitating wikipedia articles.

Footnotes 

1. This originally said "It is not attributed to a single person"