I think you're getting ahead of yourself.  That list is flawed regardless of additional citation.  The editor who added them is not addressing her or himself to the article at hand.

A better statement of policy is to enforce the actual definition of the term male chauvinism and not to let it be used interchangably with the term sexism.  The works as described do not address the theme of male chauvinism but that of sexism.  In none of the descriptions is any character credited with holding an unreasoned belief in male superiority.  Instead the male characters are treating women badly for reasons unknown or for reasons far more complicated (psycho-sexually in at least three of these instances, involving extremely complex paraphelias such as sadism and latent pedophilia) than a simple ideological and unreasoned belief.

The difference between male chauvinism, sexism directed toward women and misogyny are very real and the issue needs to be clarified in this article.  Being chauvinistic implies a belief system, sexism implies a pattern of behavior, misogyny implies an emotional reaction.  Simply put a male chauvinist or even a misogynist can think or feel whatever he or she (yes a women can be a misoginist and no, she can't be a male chauvinist) want, but if they do not act upon those thoughts or feelings then they are not appropriately described as sexist.

This is an encyclopedia.  When you are providing the meaning of a term, precision in language equals precision in thought.

the egoist