It's not outranking, it's Wikipedia ranking twice (once organically), making the SERP itself more useful by including more of the definition. As Google claims they always do, it's "Focus On The User, And All Else Will Follow."
+Logan Lynn Roberts Yes, what you're missing is the fact that the top result is giving the searcher a full enough answer that they most likely will not click through to the original source. Essentially reducing Wikipedia's CTR, UVs, and opportunity for donation.
But the first is also the nice voice response I get when asking Google now. So I sure wouldn't want it any other way. It's going to get me to goto the site anyway if I need more detail. User first, something a lot of blogs and sites forget about.
That may be the case +Shane Menshik but that doesn't make it Google's content or make Matt's statement less ironic, it doesn't change the fact that Google display knowledge graph above source, it doesn't alter that Google does everything it preaches us not to and it doesn't change the genius behind +dan barker's response... ;)
+Jon Dunn I sure wouldn't mind if my content got pushed to the top spot when people voice searched. Its not like they don't link to it and call it their own. Through donations and google now driving traffic to Wikipedia, I bet they don't mind 😋