Re:Building a Chicago style dog
Wikipedia is normally pretty accurate. And if it isn't, you can fix it. It's just not authoritative. It like logical fallacies; using one doesn't prove your conclusion to be right, but they generally can be used as a evidence. Note that what IS extremely useful in Wikipedia if you want to get at the facts are the cross-references, which frequently ARE authoritative (and note that using the fact that a source is authoritative as proof that it is correct is also a logical fallacy; it simply makes it much more likely that it is correct).
So, just because Wikipedia is not authoritative does not mean that one should be surprised when it is right.