In double checking I did go by there, but somehow read the part about Saladin using the story to mean it had some kernel of truth originally. Probably because the article says the first Western account was in 1663, nearly half a millennium after Saladin came to power. I'm not sure what relevance the first Western account has anyway; the one to verify is the oldest, not the oldest of one region. Still, the only actual outside citation there is to the recent book in which the claim about Saladin was made, which means all that's firmly established at the Wikipedia article is that the story predates the one from 1663. It seems likely that most of the damage had been done well before Islam even existed though, and my reference was more in the vein of "played a role" than "bears the blame" (as a rule I like to blame Caesars armies, but wtf really knows...?)