Is this true regarding RAC??

[RayClay]

Of course they shouldn't. At that level, Wikipedia is merely a guide to sources. Anything in Wikipedia unsourced either falls short of Wikipedia's own guidelines, or is left over from a century-old version of Encyclopedia Britannica you might be welcome to source separately.

More than once, when people have argued with me citing an incorrect Wikipedia article to support them, I've gone and edited the article and suggested they look again.

ha ha.

Actually, if you're not an idiot Wikipedia can be a great source for writing a scholarly paper. It can save you hours finding something on a subject that's difficult to search for, then you see if the article summarizes what you're looking for, then you grab all the citations they link, read them and use them to grab, or search for more sources in "acceptable" journals.

Of course, you could torture yourself reading journal database results one by one...

 

[Fencer]

Quick-hit thoughts around NFL & Pats - New England Patriots Blog - ESPN Boston, in point #10, suggests without actually saying it that RAC is ours if we want him.