Maybe what we should strive for is the standard that would be required in a good academic paper.
A good academic paper assumes quite a lot of prior knowledge. Wikipedia is intended for the layman, so we can't do that.
In an academic paper all statements of fact will be either referenced to another source or justified with logical reasoning/experimental evidence. We can only use the first of those, as we do not allow original research.
Those two differences mean that comparing Wikipedia to an academic paper is of only limited use.