Good point Bear, I think I misread the tone of your original post, which sounds a bit harsh and like it's accusing our wiki of being out of date and misleading all over the place. I'd still be interested to know where those places were.
The example you point out is certainly one of the "It's good enough" sections of the wiki, where we haven't explicitly written out line by line how to do something, but have all the documentation and framework to allow anyone to do it themselves, especially when there could be multiple ways of doing something. So, its a fair point on your part, but not sure it deserves the harshness of your first post. :-)
There are definitely the occasional out-dated section of the wiki we come across, most often when a dev points it out, and we make sure to fix those immediately. But sometimes the "It would be great if we had a really specific tutorial for making a thing do X" have to fall the wayside, because it's the same engineers writing those tutorials that are writing the code to make new stuff in the engine.
But I promise anything you point out as needing polish goes onto our todo list, and devs that have the wherewithal to make sweeping helpful changes and additions to the wiki will forever have my gratitude. :-)
