I shouldn't stick my nose in here, but being a resident DNA dweeb...the way in which WikiTree handles adoptive parents has always been problematic to me. Even so, using this instance as an example, the Help page explicitly states: "As explained above, for non-living people genetic connections should prevail."
My core problem with the matter is that we're redefining the meaning of "genealogy" if who we list as parents is optional. It isn't based on legality or preference. It's right there in the etymology of the word: it comes from the Greek, genealogia, "the making of a pedigree"; from genea, "generation, descent"; and this is derived from the Proto-Indo-European root gene; "give birth, beget." It's based on biology.
I'm certainly not saying that adoptive parents are not the most important to an individual's life. In many if not most cases, they certainly are. But by definition there's no genealogical pedigree that stems from a set of adoptive parents...even though for all of us as we move back in time our genetic family tree will become much smaller than our genealogical family tree (instances of pedigree collapse become more and more numerous the farther back in time we go).
As in Steve Job's case, listing the adoptive parents--even though they're marked as non-biological--throws off the accuracy of the tree for everything from Google search results to the WikiTree Relationship Finder and Connection Finder. By the latter, I'm supposedly 27 degrees from Steve Jobs. But I'm not. That connection goes through Paul Jobs; genealogically a completely false connection.
The constraint is that WikiTree can only have one mother and one father in its database. Ideally, that's what could change. It would be a more complex alteration than it might seem on the surface because it would involve not just database schema changes but also user interface changes.
I think one alternative might exist. It also goes against WikiTree policy, but I think it would be a solution that, while still involving some programming change, likely wouldn't be as extensive. That would be to allow an individual to have two profiles instead of only one. Then set a new privacy status perhaps called "Adoptee." Two pedigrees could then be built out and maintained as completely separate, though code changes would need to be made to exclude that status from all DNA tools and the Relationship Finder, and include a way to flag the results in the Connection Finder (there are almost certainly other changes that would be needed, as well).
Just thinking out loud. But it's simply inaccurate genealogy to have an adoptee's legal parents as the foundation for the lineage rather than the biological parents. And if the bio parents are unknown, I think something like the two-profile solution may be the only practical way for an adoptee to use WikiTree and be able to keep their research distinct and, perhaps even more importantly, to keep the resultant data accurate for the overall tree.
