Hi,

My advisor, Prof. Mitra is busy in travels this week. He said he will be posting to this thread about his thoughts later next week. 

Also, one thing he wanted me to mention here is the following: 
Although the content in the articles were generated by an algorithm, a human — I — took those articles and posted them online. We randomly chose few articles and checked whether any objectionable content was collected from the web. We planned to remove those before posting on Wikipedia. We did not create a bot that went and created the articles randomly. We generated the content offline and then copy-pasted the content of randomly selected articles. While objectionable content was decided to be removed, we did not make any changes to sentences anywhere other than that because that would void checking for linguistic consistency -- which was our soul purpose. Also, it was done in 'good faith' and hence we just worked on bare minimum articles to get an idea , not let a bot create random junk. Our algo does not have the capability of judging whether the cited references (when we search on google) are reliable or not, but we thought that reviewers on Wikipedia would remove content from such links as well as references if they are unreliable. While some references were removed because of such reasons (eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atripliceae), there were some articles removed saying promotional content (which, as well, our algo cannot really determine). 

Thanks for the comments here, we will keep them in mind if we do anything similar to this in the future, and I will try to inform other researchers who work in this area. 

Thanks,
Sidd