To be transparent with you and to offer you my own perspective, this post has done more to convince me that the dangers of AI are overblown more than anything else I've ever read.
I'm even aware of some labs that have groups of students who routinely update Wikipedia articles relevant to their research. It sounds nefarious — and some activities might be, i.e. replacing sources from other labs with your own lab's papers — but really it isn't super far off from what OP is describing. The role of a scientist is to create and disseminate new knowledge, and there are few venues better than Wikipedia to make new concepts accessible to broader audiences.
There is also some conception of Wikipedia as "for laymen", which is true to some exten... (read more)
Very related is the finding that scientific articles being used as Wikipedia sources causally gives them an average of 91% more citations: "Science Is Shaped by Wikipedia".
I appreciate your well-meaning perspective.
To be transparent with you and to offer you my own perspective, this post has done more to convince me that the dangers of AI are overblown more than anything else I've ever read.