How to cite that something is *not* on Wikipedia I am presently writing an article about a certain class of discrete probability distributions, and I want to mention that the distribution is relatively obscure compared to other common distributions.  As an indicator of its relative obscurity, I would like to mention the fact that this class of distributions does not have its own Wikipedia page, whereas other common distributions (e.g., the binomial, Poisson, hypergeometric, etc.) do have their own pages.

My question: What is the proper way to cite this evidence?  Presumably I will be citing the fact that I have performed a search of Wikipedia at a certain time, and that I found pages for various common discrete distributions, but no page for the one that is the subject of my paper.

What I am NOT asking: I am well aware of the reasons that academic papers do not usually cite Wikipedia as a source.  In this instance I only intend to cite it as an indicator of the fact that a topic is sufficiently obscure that no-one has created a page for it.  As such, I am not seeking answers on the general objections to citations to Wikipedia (which I am already familiar with).
I don't think one needs a citation for the fact that no citation exists. If you're identifying a gap in the regular literature, you can say something like 'to the authors' knowledge, no study of this kind has been published' or words to that effect and you don't need a citation to confirm that you are identifying a gap in the literature.

I find it highly unlikely that you would be criticised for wording along the lines of 'at the time of writing (possibly give date), no article exists on this topic at Wikipedia' and then maybe give a general citation for Wikipedia as a whole. As Wikipedia time stamps every edit to every article, this is something that could very easily be verified at any time in the future. I'm not sure having a Wikipedia page or not is the best measure of obscurity, but that's a different question entirely.