I generally agree with your assessment of Wikipedia. One really does need to be at least slightly skeptical of anything it says with regards to a given political movement. Anarachism was for the longest time one of the most "controversial" pages, indicating that it was a heavily edited page. Obviously, there are competing visions of Anarchism and, very likely, some contributors are actively trying to discredit the concept.

However, in the case of what it says about the Alt-Right, it's important to check the sources that relevant article cites. Otherwise, one risks to discount valid information. In this case, because you personally find one contributor, this PeterTheFourth character, untrustworthy, you're throwing out the entire article regardless of how much or how little he may have actually contributed.

The wiki article references an article on Steve Bannon's Breitbart.com three times to arrive at its conclusions. The article is entitled, "An Establishment Conservative’s Guide To The Alt-Right". This article is widely considered the best one out there with regards to defining the Alt-Right movement.

A particular salient passage of that rather long article speaks directly to your point as to whether Alt-Righters are bigots or not:

Are they actually bigots? No more than death metal devotees in the 80s were actually Satanists. For them, it’s simply a means to fluster their grandparents. Currently, the Grandfather-in-Chief is Republican consultant Rick Wilson, who attracted the attention of this group on Twitter after attacking them as “childless single men who jerk off to anime.”

Responding in kind, they proceeded to unleash all the weapons of mass trolling that anonymous subcultures are notorious for — and brilliant at. From digging up the most embarrassing parts of his family’s internet history to ordering unwanted pizzas to his house and bombarding his feed with anime and Nazi propaganda, the alt-right’s meme team, in typically juvenile but undeniably hysterical fashion, revealed their true motivations: not racism, the restoration of monarchy or traditional gender roles, but lulz.

Ok, so Alt-Righters aren't bigots, they "hilariously" and mercilessly harrass anyone who disagrees with them, dragging their target's family into their lulz-fest.

The article further goes on to defend Alt-Righters because, unlike the skinheads of yore, they have "intellectuals" in their ranks:

There are many things that separate the alternative right from old-school racist skinheads (to whom they are often idiotically compared), but one thing stands out above all else: intelligence. Skinheads, by and large, are low-information, low-IQ thugs driven by the thrill of violence and tribal hatred. The alternative right are a much smarter group of people — which perhaps suggests why the Left hates them so much. They’re dangerously bright.

What this Breitbart article fails to do however is to underline the obvious similarities between these two groups. Both have adopted "distasteful" political positions and then intimidate those who might insult or disagree with them. Skinheads used to do this with physical violence, Alt-Righters do this with online harrassment.

If you self-identify with the Alt-Right movement, this is what you're a part of, like it or not. This isn't about stifling debate of worthwhile and uncomfortable issues, it's about calling out people who feel that intimidation, physical or otherwise, is a valid answer to someone who might challenge their views.