If the articles and entries are taken with care, Wikipedia serves as a useful source for general knowledge. Now that there are more controls in place in the writing and editing process, the chances for errors (from many people including often contradictory information) and purposeful disfigurement have been reduced.
The discussions behind many of the major articles are transparent and at the same time there for the curious or the serious researcher to review.
However, because the entries are works in progress, one can never be sure (unless one has some prior knowledge about the subject) the entry's current state and whether or not it has been reviewed and developed sufficiently to warrant consideration as a "neutral" and acceptable discussion.
The continued self-criticism has been extremely beneficial and has drastically improved the quality and reliability of Wikipedia's centents.An important example may be read by following the link below:
Neutral point of view--draft - Meta