Yes, but when I search for Muezza to check if that cat hadith was true, it was standing their with that ridiculous circular reference for God knows how long. How many less suspicious muslims would have simply accepted it if they agreed with what you just said about wiki? Thankfully I did not see your way, and realised & changed it when I worked out it was false..
The reason for that is, the only people interested in that article are the muslims/ex-muslims. There are few ex-muslims using wikipedia. Most muslims were happy with the story as it was and didn't even need to research it, so it had stayed in for a while.
About the karbala article though, there will both shia and sunni editors fighting over the details, and I also think Karbala is a more important article and fetches more interest than the relatively lower-importance article about the cat. So we can generally be sure that its more objective than most other sources on this topic.