Geni:
So what you are saying is that even experts aren't that great on raw fact
checking.
It is common to cite articles on the assumption that they would not have been published without review and checking. It is unlikely that a published journal article would be a complete hoax (as opposed to containing errors). It was a mistake for the authors to cite a Wikipedia article, of course.
You seem to think its straightforward. If you think that you should
be able to propose a study design.
It is straightforward in my field. I have already studied most of the Wikipedia articles in that area, and they all contain glaring errors. Occasionally I clean some of it up, but then the errors quickly appear again.
E