Summer, IMO your latest results merely restates what we already knew. What was the exact prediction on FTDNA, including the range? If you have already confirmed the relationship, you may have to look at the downloaded match file.
IMO, you have established your relationship with your match via a paper trail and confirmed that no NonParental Event has occurred on those profiles I listed above. Unfortunately, Wikitree does not agree that you have "Confirmed with DNA" any of them.
They are mistaken and here is why.
Wikitree users are confused as to the auDNA environment and how the Science behind auDNA matches relates to Wikitree.
There two primary reasons for analyzing matches. (1) The first is to establish a family relationship between matches without a paper trial, and (2) the second is to establish that a NonParental Event has not occurred for those with a paper trial.
Wikitree is applying the rules of (1) the prior to establishing the truth of the (2) latter, which is the wrong thing to do.
You have been referred to links of the importance of certain segments and how they should be used. All of these links are used to prove (1) a relationship between matches without a paper trial. Many of the same authors, many now are quite well known, have been with 23andme, like me, since auDNA was 1st introduced. Their papers and postings for proving and not proving a relationship were in response to theories.
Postings and writings that involved matches with known documented relatives were almost always on the subject of mapping chromosomes, not proving match relationships. I have never seen anyone write that you needed to prove a relationship with DNA before you could then map chromosomes.
An example of this demonstrates my Point. http://www.yourgeneticgenealogist.com/2014/12/the-folly-of-using-small-segments-as.html
In this Article, the argument is that...
“people tend to see evidence that supports their theories and reject evidence that does not.”
These people are those who do not have the documentation to support their claim. These are theories. This article is directed at them, not those who have a documented relationship.
Unless Wikitree can accept and admit they were confused by this, it won’t be of any value to explain the rest.
Edit: Just in case the connection to wikitree was not apparent. There is an estimated 1 to 5% possibility of a Non-Parent Event occurring in any well-documented tree. When there is a match that supports the tree, that percentage drops. I am estimating to ~0%. Genetic Genealogists map the chromosomes for those connected in a match, up to but no including the Most Recent Common Ancestor(s).
For these same profiles, wikitree does not "Confirm with DNA"