Why Criticism of Wikipedia does not belong in mainspace

Because it is an essay. It is a collection of opinions, and opinions do not belong in mainspace. As Fan-1967 said on a talk page about a similar article: "People don't come to a Wikipedia article to read your opinions, or mine." I would add: Or anybody else's. The fact that these opinions have been reported in the media doesn't mean they're not opinions. Worse, these particular opinions are singularly ill-informed ones, offered by people who know little or nothing about the standards and processes by which Wikipedia actually works; instead, they are judging Wikipedia by how they think it probably works, or by what they've heard in the media, which is often inaccurate and otherwise usually incomplete. We should not give encyclopedia space to this kind of ill-considered opinion. (If you happen to speak Swedish, you might like to know that the best way I can describe the essay is "en massa löst tyckande.")

Because it is strongly POV and one-sided. This violates a fundamental standard for Wikipedia articles. Given its subject, this essay can hardly help being one-sided, but that simply underlines the fact that this subject is not a suitable one for a Wikipedia article.

Because it is navel-gazing. As I pointed out at Talk:Criticism of Wikipedia, there's no article called "Criticism of Britannica" in the Encyclopedia Britannica.

It doesn't belong in mainspace, and given the existence of pages like Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia is not so great and Wikipedia:Replies to common objections, it adds nothing to Wikipedia. We should follow our own standards and delete it.