Proponents of printed and redacted encyclopedia criticized Wiki. It grew because of recent decisions by owners of encyclopedia Britannica to stop producing their print editions.
But how the hell will I get info about all Spitfire and Bf-109's variants if not Wikipedia? They even make 2 exclusive articles for just covering the variants of Spitfire!!!! Isn't that something not to dislike? Not written by qualified experts?
I am always at doubt with people called so-called "experts" and such. My career experience would normally grant me the title "IT expert" in scholar's or academician's eyes. Yet in the face of 18 year old random 4chan anonymous hacker, I am nothing in the IT world.
My experience has always been: those crazy geeks sometimes know much more than those guys on the field. One senior pilot (4,000 flight hours on various 737 series) failed to identify a Douglas Dc-8 sitting somewhere in Los Angeles Intl Airport, referring to it as "Airbus A340," due to the similar configuration (4 engine, single floor passenger jet). Well A340 is a plane roughly 2 times larger. A random plane geek (not even working on airline or plane manufacturer) on the internet quickly corrected him.
In WW2 sense, I would trust Mudra or Taranov more than those professors randomly commenting WW2 vehicles on Discovery and History channel and especially generalizing "encyclopedia entries".