Good science requires falsifiability, which is very difficult to get in these kinds of contexts. How can you falsify a statement made about cognition? It's why I don't consider most human sciences as science at all. I can say whatever I want about the human psyche, there's plenty of ways to offer proof, but no way to disprove, therefor it's "bad science" (in quotes, cuz it's still the best we can do at this point in time).
I don't know enough about Mr. Gould to voice a proper opinion, but based on what you said he sounds like he's actually a great example of something that's been plaguing the scientific world: monetization of scientific agendas. That said, a good encyclopedia will present all points of views, regardless of their validity (altho it is welcome to comment on it where there is scientific consensus), so I'd think that's a fairly good article overall. Also worth noting, Wikipedia is largely considered accurate where pure sciences are concerned. It goes to shit rather quickly in historical or biographical articles tho :/
One more thing: correlation != proof! I'm fair sure you can agree with me that there's still no consensus. I suspect if we ever have hope of unlocking the secrets of intelligence and cognition, it will go through better understanding of information systems (which is why neuro-cognitive research teams will sometimes include computer programmers along with the expected biologists and neurologists and whatnot). The brain can be boiled down to an advanced computer working with multiple processing and signaling systems by contrast to man-made computers who's only method of processing and signaling is binary through electrical signals. If we can map all these processes and signals, we may be able to get a better grasp into the nature of cognition. Should lead to some interesting practical applications too: mind-machine interface so you can control your Exanima character like you would your very own body would be extremely cool
*edit* BTW I followed those links, but I suspect you copy/pasted those while logged in to those sites because none of them yield a full research paper for me when I click on them
Sounded like interesting reads