You're selectively reading portions of the article and ignoring the rest to come to a false conclusion.  It is very clear, both in the specific context of the specific article, and the broader context of his other writing, that Stenger regards the attempt to connect quantum mechanics with consciousness, whether by Lazla, the Maharishi and the TM Movement, including Hagelin, Capra, or others as all of a piece, whether one calls it "quantum consciousness", "cosmic consciousness", or Stenger's preferred term "quantum metaphysics", or the term used in Wikipedia "quantum mysticism", and his criticism is not limited to Lanza. The argument that the Stenger reference doesn't meet WP:V is nothing but Wikilawyering. Verifiability does not mean that a reliable source needs to provide footnotes or references for statements made by the author.  You are confusing what is required of Wikipedia editors in citing reliable, verifiable sources with what is required of the authors of those sources. That is not what verifiability means.  The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed. (Emphasis added) This paragraph is reliably sources and verifiable. Arguments to the contrary are not well-taken.