I do not have notes from that time anymore, sorry. I do recall though that after following a chain of citations I ended up at the paper in the center of this controversy. Nobody sane would cite in now except to point out its flaws, but if there’s a modern paper that cites a 10 year old paper that cites a 30 year old paper that cites it—people usually won’t notice.

From my experience, despite all the citogenesis described in other comments here, Wikipedia citations are still better vetted than in many, many scientific papers, let alone regular journalism :/ I recall spending days following citation links in already well-cited papers to basically debunk basic statements in the field.

A lack of planning on your part doesn’t constitute an emergency on mine.

Though I kind of think Japanese grammar cannot express this thought and the closest you can get is Ganbatte!

Good question! I quickly found this table, though this is yearly statistics only: https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=3510019201