Thanks for explaining. I think it's important to note that any perceived-consensus in some random-thread doesn't mean much - it's not necessarily a real consensus or conclusion, and in any case the actual site managers have their own ideas about how things should work. (And, while they clearly welcome some input, they also seem to frown upon most meta-discussion, complaint threads, coordinated-voting-pacts, and lobbying-polls.)

Personally, the occasional posts of Wikipedia articles and PG essays (even repeats when related to current topics) are valuable to me. I think it'd be a misuse of the 'flag' to suppress these. Of course anyone is free to misuse their click-power like that... I just don't want anyone to misleadingly claim that's a consensus norm, with the vague assertion "we already decided this". That seems like a rhetorical trick.