Linking to Wikipedia is a bad idea. It is a discredited information source.
I wish to draw your attention to the fact Wikipedia is a discredited information source that my university will not recognise as a credible information source due to being an open encyclopaedia. That is all entries can be edited by ANYONE, and this feature has been abused at least twice by people wishing to save their skin or someone else's skin. At best it may be a place one can find references for credible articles etc., but quite frankly it is by and large a rubbishy site whose reputation sullies the well deserved good reputation of the Logos corporation. Sure it is free to use, but as the saying goes, you get what you pay for. I'd rather have to pay a bit more to get a subscription to a reputable site like Encyclopaedia Britannica, and surely given what I imagine would be a very large customer base that Logos has it would be possible to get a good deal for Logos customers that gives us a cheaper than normal rate for subscribing, and I believe this would help to enhance the attractiveness of Logos' products. Whereas Wikipedia adds tackiness to say the least.
MJ Smith commented
Sorry but I find Wikipedia a very useful although unreliable source and would be very unhappy if this was implemented. You are correct that it is never suitable for academic work ... but I'm not doing academic work.