These are good points and it would be quite helpful if you put them in the comment next time. "The simple english wikipedia page has these specific flaws" is substantially more accurate and informative than "Wikipedia is not a source."

Well, if you want to know, my original objection was toward using Wikipedia as the arbiter of correct stance on a political issue. Wikipedia itself tries to keep politics out, and for good reason with the way online communities can groupthink. Clearly I should have expanded on that in the first comment.

I was not aware at that time that Wikipedia actually contradicted itself, but that was a very easy way to demonstrate my point in a followup post. But the particular flaws in that article were never my main point.

Flamewar: success! Pxtl wins!

Even though it's an argument about wikipedia and nobody has discussed the actual measurement system?

Eh, point. I count any thread with a buried comment (like yours) as a flamewar, is all ;)