These are all bad-faith takes. What are you doing?

24 years ago, some people wrote on Wikipedia instead of elsewhere. So the wiki page itself became a primary source.

"The page shouldn't have been submitted..." This was a Wiki! If you're unfamiliar with the origin of the term, it was a site mechanism designed to lean in to quick capture and interweaving of documents. Volunteers wrote; the organization of the text arose through thousands of hands shaping it. Most of them were software developers at the time. At a minimum, the software-oriented pages should get special treatment for that alone.

You're acting as though this is producing the next edition of Encyclopedia Britannica, held to a pale imitation of its standards circa the 1980s. The thing is, Britannica employed people to go do research for its articles.

Wikipedia is not Britannica, and this retroactive "shame on them" is unbelievable nonsense.