Wow. The wolf experts are shocked. There's been a fatal wolf attack in Alaska.
They express surprise! "Wow," they say. "This is only the second documented fatality ever recorded!"
Yeah, ya think? Know why? Because it's hard to document something when you're dead and your intestines have taken up residence in a wolf's belly!
Only survivors have the chance to talk.
There are two reasons we're now hearing of these attacks. First, we have better modes of communication.
For instance, let's say a wolf attack happened in the 1800s. If there were any survivors, they might eventually get to "civilization" where they could tell the tale of the attack but there would be no real evidence, little interest in finding any, and the story would become "rumor". And how many average people wrote then, and if they could write, how many took the time to do so when there was a living to be made? And how much of their writing would survive to become "documentation"? Very little.
Secondly, our modern lives give us better reaction time and we have more ability to do research than ever before. Not only were the wolves that killed this woman tracked and killed, but they're also going to make sure that the right wolves were killed by matching their teeth to the bite marks. This concept would have been unheard of in the 1800s.
To sum it up: Wolf attacks are quite plausible. I have always been amused by how many "experts" maintain that wolves are lovable, harmless fuzzballs. Look at their teeth, for crying out loud! It's not like they chew cud.