This is the same discussion we had earlier with the use of "Uncertain" for everything that is not certain. It is completely inadequate. Genealogy is far from "black and white," certain and uncertain.
We now have "uncertain" and three other radio buttons, "non-biological," "confident," and "confirmed with DNA," none of which fit the needs of the community. This article by Randol Schoenberg, "On Certainty in Genealogy" defines the problem.
First of all, there is no such thing as "certain" in genealogy. "I think of every genealogical fact I put on Geni [WikiTree] as a hypothesis waiting to be tested by other genealogists." It is all uncertain - to varying degrees, until/unless it is disproven.
The idea is to add as many primary documents, or pieces of evidence as possible. "The ability to allow others to recreate an experiment and independently assess the evidence is at the heart of the scientific method. The results of this type of scientific collaboration on a shared platform are clearly superior, leading to more discoveries and more correction of mistakes."
Uncertain can be everything from uninvestigated to disproven, and DNA is just another piece of evidence, not the be-all and end-all which "confirms" anything! Please see Blaine Bettinger "The DNA Era of Genealogy."
The WikiTree team should support efforts to analyze evidence, and to publish conclusions. If not that, then what are we doing here? Any work-around is a "a plan or method to circumvent a problem," so let's solve the problem, especially since it is central to the mission. Thanks!