Actually, the Wiki doesn't mention a version number or a status. It certainly doesn't claim that the release is a beta. In fact, the only way to even see a version number is to follow the installation instructions. (Well, the instructions themselves have a version number in a screenshot, but that's version 0.3, not 0.4.)

Actually, I wouldn't even call it alpha, but since there's no real definition for "alpha" and "beta" in software, it's all a matter of semantics. (My personal definition of "beta" is that it's 100% feature-complete, and fairly stable, but most people appear to have a much less strenuous definition.) Version numbers (particularly pre-1.0 ones) are even more ambiguous, so I don't personally see anything wrong with them calling it version 0.4. After all, that could imply that it's less than half-way to a 1.0 release. My suspicion for this is that it's actually just a number than keeps incrementing, so eventually they'll get to 0.10, then 0.11, etc.

Basically what I'm trying to say here is that the Wiki post itself seems fairly reasonable.