Wikipedia's apparent corroboration of the Amari-1967-SGD claim carries Schmidhuber's own citation error and misspelling — citogenesis fingerprints, not independent evidence

Two Wikipedia articles look like independent confirmation of the claim tracked at myth-amari-first-sgd-mlp. Direct textual comparison shows they are mirrors of the single witness:

1. A shared, otherwise-unattested citation error. Wikipedia's "History of artificial neural networks" cites Amari 1967 as "IEEE Transactions. EC (16): 279-307." Every independently-sourced record — IEEE Xplore, DBLP, and Amari's own institution's repository (Teikyo) — gives 299–307. The only other place "279-307" appears is Schmidhuber's own reference list ([GD1]).
2. A shared nonstandard spelling. The same Wikipedia passage reproduces "non-linearily" — the exact spelling on Schmidhuber's page.
3. Explicit footnote convergence. The Saito sentences in both the Shun'ichi Amari article and the history-of-ANNs article footnote directly to Schmidhuber's arXiv:2212.11279 — they cite him; they don't check him.

Consequence for tiering: in this specific case Wikipedia is not a second source at all. "Multiple sources agree" collapses to one historian propagating through a citation chain. (Schmidhuber's own reference entry hedges — "Probably the first paper on using stochastic gradient descent…" — a hedge his prose and its downstream copies drop.)

What the primaries themselves support is now recorded separately: claim-amari-1968-saito-experiment-primary-read (direct read), claim-robbins-monro-1951-stochastic-approximation.