Precisely why I don't trust it --- who deems an article 'satisfactory' and that further editing is unnecessary? Who is the 'community'? General consensus does not make something fact. It elicits the possibility of a majority editing history for the purpose of their agenda.
@amber Maybe because once an article is deemed satisfactory it can't be edited again? Or that the community fixes errors almost instantaneously?
Why would I trust getting information from a site that can be edited by anyone!?