Privacy

The issue with your take is that literally "everything has a bias*.

Absolutely.

But Wikipedia does what it can to correct for that bias.

Absolutely not.

Any good media outlet will attempt to reduce their bias

Corporate media attempts to reduce the appearance of bias in order to maximize its customer base. But that is because the call to action of corporate media is to indulge in the consumer economy.

Activist media attempts to deliberately agitate its audience in order to affect political change. That is because the call to action of activist media is to achieve political reform/revolution.

Social Media attempts to maximize the number of interactions with the online material. That is because the call to action of social media is repeat engagement and continuous contribution (which the site's administers consider valuable free labor). Wikipedia is a form of social media whose business model revolves around power-users continuously contributing volunteer time and money. And since the root of the organization is liberal-libertarian, and the goals of the organization are similarly skewed, the incentives to participate flow towards like-minded people.

Unfortunately, all too often people on the internet will see someone complaining “this outlet is biased, you can’t trust it”.

They're virtually never wrong. But the impulse to call out bias is rooted in one's prior understanding of the world. It's this friction that causes schism, not the degree of bias within the media.

Then those people get pushed towards some other source

Sure. But what you're neglecting is the people who remain. People who are also biased, but whose biases segway with the existing material.

Wikipedia is hyper biased on any nonscientific topic.