Wikipedia bans Daily Mail as ‘unreliable’ source
Wikipedia Foundation office in San Francisco, US [Image: Eric Risberg/AP].
In the light of this decision, one wonders whether the online encyclopaedia’s critics are avid Mail readers.
Wikipedia editors have voted to ban the Daily Mail as a source for the website in all but exceptional circumstances after deeming the news group “generally unreliable”.
The editors described the arguments for a ban as “centred on the Daily Mail’s reputation for poor fact checking, sensationalism and flat-out fabrication”.
Source: Wikipedia bans Daily Mail as ‘unreliable’ source | Technology | The Guardian
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
That’s good news, but shouldn’t the Sun, Daily Express and Daily Telegraph be treated in the same way?
Well wiki can be reliable but also unreliable on “facts” it has I have several times corrected its proven to be incorrect claims o deaths at stafford hospital, only to have the original claims which are not true put back into the pieces.