Ehh. Increasing the number of potential instances doesn't really change the fact that the reference would still be rather shoehorned in rather than feeling natural. There's no guarantee that the whole "there are MORE out there, ONES WE NEED TO FIND!" scare will make the article any more interesting or enjoyable to read.
Furthermore, the indication of terrible [REDACTED] violence and the offhand, "poor [subject], now we have to clean up after" comment are both aspects commonly found in older articles from five or more years ago, and aren't exactly recommended nowadays because they seem rather trite.
As such, Jeighmann, please refrain from giving further feedback in the forums until you've gotten a successful page posted to the mainsite.
Do not respond if you are not staff. This is a closed staff post.