Why do you think Wikipedia is not accepted as a credible web resource?
Wikipedia is not accepted as a credible web resource because its pages can potentially be modified and created by anyone. The website does get around to verifying the information that it stores, yet there is no garuntee that the page you are visiting has been verified to be accurate. The creation of pages on wikipedia is completely outside of the realm of academia, of which most of its references originally come from. It stands to reason that if we trust the references that wikipedia uses to produce its pages, then we should perhaps skip the less credible wikipedia and aim to use the traditionally credible resources found on the web.
Wikipedia also does not publish the author of its content, so the information cannot be traced to an identity. This is problematic for referencing reasons but it also poses the issue of not knowing the credentials of the author, possible biases on a subject, and reasons for publishing work. The fact that anyone can publish information on wikipedia alone makes it far less credible than scholarly articles and webpages.