it is NOT. There's a Website called wikibiases just for that. If you go to any topic that isn't European you'll find PLENTY of mistakes. Because Wikipedia is eurocentric! It is not better then textbooks (some textbooks at least)
There's a reason most teachers don't allow it as a source for essays.
Wikipedia's existence is important, but it's also largely inaccurate. It should not be treated as a reliable source.
Based on this post I was expecting wikibiases to have like... 100 pages on different topics being represented wrongly based on outdated scholarship or "pop science" instead of actual science, but 90% of it is about political lean surrounding Israel. So it's different from what I expected. Still kind of interesting, but I think "in articles where politics matters, Wikipedia has a position near the middle of the overton window even if that isn't true" is very different from "it's wrong on things that aren't European". There are plenty of Europe focused articles where the objective truth according to science doesn't match the middle of political views and then this also happens.
See also: the amount of text on the talk page of ROGD in Dutch wikipedia to get people to stop citing tabloids in favour of its existence and start actually starting the article with "this is BS research that turned out to be untrue".
That said, if politics isn't involved and interest is plentiful (say, in an article about Python as a programming language) I think Wikipedia is likely to be accurate. But that is a specific subset of the articles.
Wikipedia is a tertiary source - that's why you're not allowed to use it on essays, you should be using primary or secondary sources for that. The aim of Wikipedia - as with many tertiary sources - is to present information that comes from primary and secondary sources on the particular topic (you can't cite Wikipedia on Wikipedia). It isn't supposed to change, infer, or analyse any of the information it presents.
All the information presented on Wikipedia is supposed to have a citation - that's why when it doesn't it says "citation needed." Wikipedia also makes sure that all its online citations are archived - usually via the wayback machine.
This means that when you read something on Wikipedia, you can check the source they are citing and verify the information.
This actually makes Wikipedia a very useful research starter. You can use it to get an initial impression of the information, and then follow the citations for a deeper understanding.
None of this is to say that there aren't biases in Wikipedia - there definitely are and you should be aware of that so you can verify and judge the quality of the information for yourself. Even Wikipedia acknowledges that sometimes it is wrong.
Remember: Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, and that includes you. If you see something uncited, incorrect, missing, or biased you can submit an edit to the wiki page. Here is the tutorial how.
