You *Could* Present The Simple Solutions As Simple, Elegant, But Only Useful In Certain Cases 

The reliable sources that point out that the simple solutions don't generalize when certain assumptions are changed do not have to be considered critics. Rather, the Wikipedia article could introduce the simple solutions as wonderfully accessible devices to explain the 2/3 & 1/3 vs 50/50 paradox of door 1 and door 3, *because* of the unique premises of the problem. It would be very useful to point out that if certain premises were changed, one might need a tool that can handle the complexities of conditional problems (unlike the 100% likelihood of revealing a goat behind another door). Then refer the reader to a section which gives voice to the reliable sources who offer up a host bias or the random Monty, or whatever, to explain to the interested reader what a conditional problem looks like.