Wikipedia is teeming with "articles" about dubious sites, shabby content, duplication of existing web pages, concealed advertisement, links.
The talk about rules on wikipedia is a joke. They do not exist in reality. Some empty words are marked as rules. But nobody implements even them. It is a mere and pure dictatorship by the few persons, who hijacked it.
Some administrators are actually the same person. But it does not matter: whether there are 200 administrators, or just 3 posing as 100. The essence is the same.
The main rule of Wikipedia is an unwritten one: defend any rubbish, which is already there; fend off any sensible content or suggestions, which are coming in.
The trick is to get the shabby content in, somehow. Afterwards it may live forever. Administrators will simply cry fowl every time you do any correction. Then they will delete your correction and delete it from trash (so called history), so that nobody sees it, and nobody can punish the administrator. They hide the evidence.
If you try to dig the dirt, you get banned, and they throw even more rubbish on top, lest anyone discovers their evil deed.
They will delete discussion, call you names, ban you, label an enemy of the public, urge you not to instill principles, urge you to be corrupt, and obey orders of administrators. They will talk just about anything, except the subject: an inappropriate article, which they defend, or abuse by administrators.
Nobody ever remembers in wikipedia, that an administrator is not a chief, but a servant.
You suggest we do a research about wikipedia. But I did. You did not. If you try to criticize any content on wikipedia, you will come to same results, and conclusions.
When someone writes an encyclopedia, then one must pass all the checks of credibility. Usually it is a well recognized team. Otherwise they would fail spectacularly in terms of finance.
When one tries to write on wikipedia, all one needs to be is an idiot. That's because an idiot is not allowed to write an encyclopedia. So, one resorts to wikipedia.
Wikipedia does not fail, because it does not sell anything. It collects donations, handouts. The main purpose of wikipedia is begging for money. Get rich quick. Content is auxiliary. So, idiots do not have to pay for any slobbery they smudge the web pages there with.
On wikipedia it does not cost you anything to be an idiot. You can even pass there as a great "scientist".
Simply create two or more accounts, gain the administrator's rights for each of them, and you can grant yourself numerous honors. There's nobody to restrain you there.
The aim of wikipedia is to grab from the web as many articles as possible. Then they get some "rewards", and recognition. There's even a special page, where every 100000 articles they award a "medal" to some national section.
If you pull the same tricks on element-14, there's a big chance that you get discovered and banned before you reek any greater havoc. That's because here monkeys are not allowed to take over (hijack) the monkey house.
In this sense element-14 is indeed a competitor to wikipedia. Because there's nothing sensible that you can't write here. On wikipedia there's nothing sensible that you can write there. Sorry, I have not ever read anything there authoritative enough, or at least meaningful enough.
Wikipedia is simply corrupt to the core.
Yet this is not the main reason not to post an article about element-14 there. Though this is a reson good enough.
The main reason is that there's no reason to post this on wikipedia at all. Wikipedia is not that important... (Or rater it is unimportant at all.) Neither the article would be that important.
Can you back up your claims somehow? There is a pretty damn good reason for an article about Element14 not being on Wikipedia. It's well-documented on the website itself (as much as it deserves credit anyway, since two attempts at writing a description ended up disapproved by the moderators...).
