Inarguably, not arguably. In my mind there is a clear separation between pre and post sci-hub. The stark increase in experienced friction when accessing scientific knowledge since sci-hub's pausing has highlighted its profound value.
There's also libgen, the closest thing to a bastion of all written human knowledge.
It'd be fun to read a short story about an AI trained on libgen data that makes significant contributions to fusion, longevity and cancer but whose creators are ineligible for any prizes and are jailed for life for multiple counts of copyright violation.
There was a notability challenge in en.wikipedia on Olavo de Carvalho, a Steve Bannon type who wrote some philosophy books (like -- on Aristotle and Epicurus) as a younger man (and keeps getting his "philosopher" self-nomination challenged because he didn't go and get a college major in philosophy). I was for keeping the page, but on balance I think the process, arguments and result were fair -- even if almost certainly carrying some underlying political motivation.
We have to focus on the process. It's the only way to general axiology.
I'm no longer motivated to fight deletionism in my domain. I don't want to spend time that is not appreciated.
I suspect that as soon as a page is tagged for deletion by someone, others that enjoy being the arbiters of what is and is not WP, flock there. If they lack interest in the topic, they will vote to remove with many technical reasons. Statements that others do find it relevant or interesting, are simply ignored.
A main gripe is that more often than not, the supporting links for claims made in wikipedia articles are broken or of poor quality. Another is the tendency of ideologues to remove anything they disagree with in their particular domain.
It's useful for finding trivial information (flag of Botswana, say) but otherwise I usually block wikipedia from search results.
That reason is because Wikipedia is a tertiary source. It's too far removed from a source of information to be appropriate to cite. It has nothing to do with the reliability of the site; it's basically never appropriate to cite any kind of encyclopedia.
If there's a specific piece of information you found on Wikipedia, you chase down Wikipedia's source for that information and cite that. If you're using Wikipedia as a general reference, you don't need to cite that at all.