Strongly agree with you.
I didn't refer to a paragraph. What I said was wrong was the conflation of logical positivism with verificationism (so that an attack on verificationism becomes an attack on logical positivism). If you think he didn't mean to conflate the two, you might be right.
I think the SEP really tries its best to be understandable for newcomers while not dumbing-down things too much (unlike so many popular philosophy books and articles). As a non-philosophy grad trying to intermittently delve into philosophy, the encyclopedia has been a very valuable resource to me, for getting a rough outline of the philosophical ideas and debates throughout history.