> I find it surprising that Wikipedia ever considered using Fedora as a
> server platform.
The wikipedia article has been widely misreported and taken out of context by fanboys with axes to grind.
What it basically says is that wikipedia has experienced explosive growth, moving from a size where it's ok to use a small set of cobbled together servers with heterogeneous systems (their mix included Fedora, old Red Hat Linux, etc) to a size where this heterogeneous mix is prohibitively expensive to maintain (well known situation in any big org).
So at one time they had to say "anything but this mix of heterogeneous stuff, we'll take *one* option and use it everywhere". And then they gave this article stating how nice it was to have a single system to support, now they've gotten rid of the old mismatched stuff.
Their single option happened to be Ubuntu LTS, but there's precious little in the article suggesting Centos (or a BSD, or OSX) wouldn't have been as good for their needs.
I guess "wikipedia consolidates on a single system, saves admin time" would not have made the headlines. But there's nothing more to see in there.