Well, well, so you’ve declared yourself the supreme arbiter of knowledge, disinterested in anything 'less than Wikipedia' -- yet seemingly unable to offer a single source 'more' credible. You toss out the term 'troll' as if it’s some magic shield, deflecting any question that might challenge the fortress of your own knowledge. So let’s get this straight: you dismissed Wikipedia, dismissed reasoned rebuttals, and now you’re dismissing questions that expose the lack of substance in your own argument.
How convenient.
But let’s be clear: it’s not trolling to question the hollow bravado of your 'Wikipedia-is-always-wrong' routine. It’s called calling out empty rhetoric for exactly what it is: an attempt to sidestep discussion. So, here’s the simple question again -- since you’re so intent on proving you’re beyond the basics: what credible source, or indeed any source, do you have that is so magnificently 'above' Wikipedia? Or is dismissing others' sources all you actually bring to the table?