This kind of subterfuge strikes me as particularly nefarious. Certainly it is not in line with our goals to cite Wikipedia articles as if they were authoritative references? I would typically run a database query to see exactly how prevalent this practice is, but am unable to at the moment. Nonetheless, I find this single case disturbing!
Wikipedia articles shouldn't be cited at all, as far as I know. Either you include the information in the article and cite a reliable source, or just link to the other article for further information and the reliable source is cited there. I hope it's not widespread - from personal experience, I don't think it is (anecdote n. (pl. data) ;)).