Wikipedia/OSM integration

An open ended question related to both OSM and Wikipedia:

Since I enabled Wikipedia points on my OsmAnd and have been noticing that GPS coordinates coming from Wikipedia articles are few blocks/miles off, while OSM data either missing Wikipedia link or is more accurate vs Wikipedia coordinates.

Right now, I would have to update both sites manually. Are there plans to integrate two services to have a single master location for the data (coordinates), preferably to have wikipedia recognize existing link from OSM, and slurp in the location data?

Quick example, with correct location in OSM:

I don’t know what plans exist, but would note that OSM and Wikipedia are run by different organisations.

However, most coordinates on Wikipedia, probably, come from Google Maps, directly or indirectly, and MUST NOT be used on OSM. Wikipedia takes a much more liberal position than OSM on the issue that it might be duplicating a database in large numbers of small pieces.

In the case of businesses (and that can include commercial attractions), at least in the UK, one common reason for Google Maps to have wrong information is that the business, or its advertising agency, submits its postcode, rather than actually working out its correct position, by GPS, or relative to street topology. That can result in significant errors if the business isn’t of the type that generates a lot of incoming mail.

AFAIK, there are some experiments to integrate data from OSM into Wikipedia, but this works via the wikidata key in OSM. I thought the wikipedia articles are updated automatically via this system every 2 days, but I cannot find a reference at the moment

see and and for more information

One other big difference between OSM and Wikipedia is that OSM started as a primary source, whereas Wikipedia forbids its articles being primary sources. Any geographical coordinates in Wikipedia should have a source attached to them and should reflect what appears in that source, even if it wrong. The real way to get alignment with OSM is to encourage Wikipedia authors to use OSM, rather than Google, as their source.

(An article that was obeying the WP rules well might well say something like: "Estimates of the location of XYZ vary by over a wide area, with extremes being a,b [1] and c,d [2].[3]

[1] http://www.openstreetmap
[2] http://maps.googole

even if the author knew that one of these was wrong from his own, original research. The only time the article should only really give one position, is if all, or an overwhelming majority of, sources agreed.)