The fact she went to the Holy land, dug for the cross, and found a cross is pretty solidly documented.
That of course doe not prove at all that the Cross she was sure was the true cross was indeed the True Cross. In fact I find that doubtful But the fact she was likely wrong, does not make her a liar.
Which part of that article do you say describes these claims as “solidly documented”? I’m not wading through the whole thing but from my skim of it, at best there are some accounts decades if not centuries after St Helen’s tale was first told, and they appear to be based on what she said, which is not to be trusted IMHO.
Did anyone, other than a religious fantasist and liar, document the dig at the time?
I think we have monopolized this thread enough. You can start a new thread if you like.