Wikipedia has a different version of the history of Austrian economics than I have on this website (see the links Keynesian economics vs. Austrian economics and My premise / why I have it) that is probably more correct, certainly more thorough. I have known about Austrian economics since the 1980's, long before Wikipedia existed or the internet was publicly available, and the version of the history that I present on this website is the one that I am aware of, but the Wikipedia one is undoubtedly better-researched and undoubtedly also has much more accurate information. When I was studying Austrian economics in the 1980's, the focus was primarily on what Austrian economics said, not on the details of the origins. I am sure the version of the history in Wikipedia is probably right, but the differences between it and what I say about the origins of Austrian economics on this website (which was only intended to be a summary anyway) does not change the basic point that I am trying to make on this website one bit.
As for Austrian economics itself, I would say that the only additional comment I will make with regard to the Wikipedia entry is that I am not as libertarian as the article seems to make most modern adherents to the Austrian theory out to be.
As noted in the Wikipedia article, the Austrian theory is not accepted by current mainstream economics. Current mainstream economics, at least in America, is (neo)Keynesian, and this website discusses the issues around Keynesian and Austrian economics at some length - see directly-related links on this website that are explicitly labeled as such, as well as the comment about Austrian economics that is at the bottom of the link How Elliott, Keynes, and Kondratieff fit together.
As noted in the Wikipedia article, mainstream economics believes in mathematical modeling, whereas Austrian economists argue that mathematical models and statistics are an unreliable means of analyzing and testing economic theory, and advocate deriving economic theory logically from basic principles of human action. The Wikipedia article goes on to say some more things about that at the detail level, which I am also (at minimum mostly) in agreement with. At the bottom of my link Keynesian economics vs. Austrian economics, I refute the idea in just a short paragraph (that is all it takes, in my opinion) that economics can be reduced to a set of equations. My basic premise is that economics is a social science, not a hard science, and people cannot be reduced to a set of equations.