It's a secondary or tertiary source that does a great job or collecting and summarizing primary lit (which can be cited if more rigor is preferred, at the cost of context). My college professors encouraged the use of both, maybe with the caveat of citing a particular Wikipedia revision rather than the article directly.

But seriously, these were the discussions we've had two decades ago. If a professor today had such an issue, they're very old fashioned, and I'd probably walk out of that class because who knows what else that professor is out of date on.

So many fields today are evolving so rapidly, I wouldn't trust any single expert on a topic. Better to have a living crowdsourced reference that collects many sources.