To be fair, WikiPedia itself warns on almost every page that some of the information provides no sources, and therefore is liable to removal. Assuming that there _is_ a verified source, then just link to that, then there can be no suggestion that the page has been altered merely to win the argument.

If no source is given, then the information is no more reliable than saying "it worked for me" or whatever.

Basically, quoting Wikipedia is a sub-clause of Godwins rule, or should be.