Spontaneous Generation

Is it just me, or does the current Wikipedia explanation of how Pond Flukes appear in stagnant ponds rely on the theory of spontaneous generation, which was discredited, oh, well over a hundred years ago? I generally adore Wikipedia, so this kind of inaccuracy distresses me, as it's precisely the kind of thing that people point to when they say that Wikipedia shouldn't be trusted and/or shouldn't exist, and it's the kind of thing that gives those critics a point.

(I am also distressed because I'm tempted, again, to join Wikipedia as an editor, and I think this would not be a good plan for me, finding yet another online community to obsess over and where I can get into arguments. I'm trying to resist! I am!)

So, what, aside of a lengthy research project to verify the existence of and detail the life cycle of pond flukes, do I do about this article?