"if the OpenStreetMap wiki isn't "authoritative," what is?" How about local mappers want the object to be tagged and or in conjection with the on the ground rule maybe? Honestly I can understand where your coming from. The Wiki should be at least a semi-authorative source of how to tag things, but them every time I cite the thing or an edit an article I get attacked for trying to push my way of doing things on other people. Same goes for mapping in areas where I don't live to BTW. It uaually results in concern trolls who don't live in the area either coming along and causing drama about"local mappers" and the on the ground rule. So at least the ship of the Wiki being any kind of authority sunk a long time ago. 

What we need is some core tags for the most important types of objects that are curated and enforced by the WMF. Until then though, the Wiki is only as you can throw it. Articles are good way for new mappers to see what tags are out there and how to use them locally, but what they say isn't a valid excuse to overide the preferences of locals who actually been to the places your mapping. In this case I'm willing to say neither one of the tags we want to use are 100% accurate, but at least landise=recreation_ground fits better with my experiences as a local of riding my mountain bike around the area for years. It's kind of a side thing, but BLM land isn't really mapped around here (or really anywhere that I'm aware of) anyway and if I had my way this wouldn't be mapped in the first place since it doesn't really have an exact area to begin with (the current boundary is pretty inaccurate), but if it has to be mapped then landuse=recreation_ground is better then tagging it as a nature reserve. 