What’s the problem? Wikipedia will always be free to use.
Some people will always support it, others won’t. Life will go on.
This is exactly like trying to cancel someone on YouTube. Just don’t watch the channel.
Perhaps it's because it's deceptive, dishonest & undermines trust.
Unless of-course you don't care about such things, then what's the problem? You don't have to read my comment, 'just' switch off the website.
The problem is that Wikipedia goes to great effort to shill for the CIA-NATO propaganda machine - whilst deceptively claiming they're an independent factual source. The problem is that the youth of Western Europe & The USA are growing up where truth is forbidden by power; buried by Google then muddied by Wikipedia & co.
The problem is when trust is eroded we cannot have meaningful interactions, we cannot even communicate, to the point that: it doesn't matter if one says 'eric4smith is a rapist'; because (as you have conjectured): 'you don't have to read the comment'.
What exactly are you saying? Are you suggesting that thousands of Wikipedia editors have all been subborned by Western military agencies? Or are you just referring to the overpaid Wikimedia C-suite?
Of course some Wikipedia editors are shills. Most MSM journalists are shilling for someone; if you pay attention to current affairs, you'll bump into a shill within seconds. But Wikipedia is largely self-correcting; even if the mainspace articles are biased, (a) there's page history; (b) there's per-editor contribution history; and (c) there's talk pages. I don't know of any other information source that provides so many tools that a critical reader can use to judge the content of an article.