&gt;Wikipedia&#x27;s aim may not be to become popular by just being an eye-candy. One of their features, what you call there as &quot;dull grey textbook&quot; is what I like very much. It allows the reader to read the thing comfortably and it also helps the pages load faster.<p>The format may suit you, but text, especially text in the long-form articles that are standard for Wikipedia is a poor format for the news-based articles that are the most popular on Wikipedia.<p>&gt;If you stick to only some news (e.g. celebrity news) you won&#x27;t get much controversy. But wikipedia is not for just news topics. It has provided space for many oppressed groups to post their views which are sure to generate controversy.<p>Wikipedia is a very expensive (time and energy) way to get information out to the public. Sending a video to Twitter and Facebook are easier and more shareable.<p>&gt;I don&#x27;t say that there is no need to improve Wikipedia but it requires better and deeper understanding and appreciation of Wikipedia, its readership and its goals.<p>Even with this, good luck getting any meaningful change from the Wikimedia Foundation.