The article opens with the question, "What the hell happened to WikiLeaks?" then argues that "Once an inspiring effort at transparency, WikiLeaks now seems more driven by personal grudges and reckless releases of information..."
So, you're saying they turned into Anonymous?
What you are describing is original research and has been against policy since even before 2006. Wikipedia wants to reflect the mainstream press and most reliable sources. It makes no claims to represent a "truth" beyond that. If something is wrong in the mainstream press, fix it there.
The problem is that more and more the mainstream press is using Wikipedia for it's fact checking, resulting in a doom spiral for truth.
If you didn't have to work so hard, you'd have more time to be depressed.