Maybe I need to add a section (in bold, flashing red text?) reiterating that you need to read the citations and not rely on the content?

This recent example is awful, yes, but relied heavily on a Wikipedia project which has less strict referencing rules, and was consumed by people who didn't take the time to fact-check — we're about on par with Encyclopedia Britannica (ref: https://www.nature.com/articles/438900a)