The Wiki article is actually good if pretty basic information. I say "basic" because probably every single paragraph in the article could easily be expanded into a whole chapter (or two, or three) in order to cover all the ifs, ands, and buts about the subject. Also, take a look at the references and you'll see a lot of Shaw which certainly isn't a bad place to start, after all, Shaw basically used the TOPGUN manual as his source.
The problem, and what leads to lots of discussion, is figuring out what all this stuff really means to someone trying to apply the information in the real (or virtual) world.
I suppose the real issue here is the OP's attitude and assumptions which makes for a pretty unattractive argument to convince anyone to actually look at the article or stimulate an intelligent conversation on the subject.
BTW, not to be a "know it all" but, since the OP seems to be all hot and bothered by accuracy, it's just ACM not "ACM's" with the apostrophe s. Never, ever use the term ACM's. Same with BMF...no apostrophe s. Nothing personal, just trying to rid the forum world of some gibberish.