Completely random example of such a lab (and if you check publications you'll see they host papers under this domain name) https://www.honeylab.org/
I know things on utoronto.ca turn up sometimes for a example that does (UofTs non-edu domain name, which is used for most things. Though toronto.edu is also owned by the university and used for some things).
But Scholar proves it is possible to usefully filter for peer-reviewed papers.
Filtering is never "perfect". The question is whether it is good enough to be useful.
I use it sometimes for historical scores from past championships but beyond that I have plenty of non-Wikipedia sources for real-time or recent scores.
Nor can I say I have ever used Wikipedia to find sites that publish scores, either.
But maybe I just have not discovered how Wikipedia can be used for basketball scores. No doubt there are better sources for basketbal scores.
Anyway, I fail to see how giving someone the option to restrict Wikipedia "Related Links" and "References" to, say, academic ones would interfere with the status quo. It would not stop anyone from getting basketball scores by any manner they choose. Obviously do not enable an option to restrict to academic sources if looking for sports scores.
It's fascinating to see comments like this that try to argue against hypothetical options (I have seen this sort of comment before) because software and "tech" companies have a long history of forcing new "features" on people who never asked for them. People are not even given a choice. "Do you want this new feature?" is not a question that is ever asked.
Do we really want Google to have even more authority of what is considered accepted truths in society?
At the same time, it would be silly not to admit Scholar is quite useful. Not everyone has a subscription to a large collection of academic journals and many papers are often published via non-commercial websites, as pre-prints, etc.
Imagine prohibiting Wikipedia editors from using Google Search when researching Wikipedia articles. If they are allowed to use it then that means Google has some control over what is cited in Wikipedia.
Limit "External Links" to only websites found in Google Scholar. More specifically, limit them to only academic sources. (Maybe limiting to .edu or country-specific educational TLDs, e.g., ac.uk, etc. is better. I realise Scholar is hardly a reliable filter for non-commercial sources, given Google's incentives. Remember "Knol".)
This could be an option. Maybe an HTTP header sent to Wikipedia:
The way to "fix the quality of article" is to fix the quality of sources. As it stands, Wikipedia can use any source it finds on the web. (Not to say they do in practice.) That can be an extremely low bar.One can use Wikipedia solely as a path to "External Links" and/or "References". To the extent that articles just take their sentences from References or External Links, any verification needs to be done on the source, not the article. I use Wikipedia as the default search engine in Fennec. On desktop, I search Wikipedia from the command line with a custom script. The forward proxy scrubs the "X-Client-IP" header. Before reading an article, in the event I read the article instead of only using External LInks and references, I always skim the Talk: page.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Knol/Archive_1https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Knol/Archive_2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Knol/Archive_3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Knol/Archive_4