On a general note - per my reading, unwikiing as described in quoted guidance suggests rather strong moderator effort and scrutiny of the questions and answers.
Because of this, it looks reasonable to complement unwiki review with "Atwood's cleanup", following guidance provided in related discussion at MSE:
...answers that are strong candidates for deletion:
belong to low rep or anon users with no real commitment to the community
are provably duplicate, that is, were added well after (30+ mins later) other answers that contained the same exact information
are short in length
do not explain much of anything
Now, few observations related to some specific wiki posts...
This question looks... inconsistent regarding wiki status:
Wiki is removed from above question, but kept for its answers. We had meta discussion on it, but it appears to be hanging without understandable resolution: Un-community wiki this question?
Below two questions look like "wrong kind of wiki" - as far as I can tell, collaborative effort lock is more appropriate:
Checking revisions history of below question, I can't make up my mind whether it qualifies for "worthless edits merely to bump" or not. If edits are indeed reasonable, then I think it would be better to un-wiki it:
Per my reading, following questions look worthy of close and historical lock instead of unwikiing:
Historical lock suggested because these questions have over 50K views each.
I also briefly checked other open wiki questions.
Per cursory glance, all of them look worth considering for unwikiing. Just please keep in mind that I did not check their revisions history for either "substantive edits from multiple editors" or "worthless edits" that could probably qualify for keeping them CW.