@Qingu You might not realise, this not having a PhD, but the letters PhD go after your name and believe me you need to be able to use sources and logic to get those letters.
While Wikipedia’s philosophy may be that “expertise” is a transient thing that is best proven by use of sources and logic the majority of contributors use neither and when they do use evidence to back up their argument the sources they use are often of very low quality suggesting that either they don’t have a good grasp of the topic or they are making a point that is contradictory to general the consensus.
“Real” encyclopedias are not updated as much because as general rule a lot of things in them don’t need to be updated. The history of the Roman empire for example is not going to change so much that it requires updating every minute. It also means you can go back to an article without fear of being radically altered due to some deluded idiot who thinks New York isn’t in the state of New York.
While “real” encyclopedias may be biased that bias generally comes from the publisher not the individual author and is therefore consistent across the entire work, it does not change from article to article quite so much and it certainly doesn’t change half way through an article.