Jump to content

Wikipedia bans the Daily Mail as a source for being 'unreliable'


Camacho

Recommended Posts

:1251:

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/wikipedia-editors-ban-daily-mail-source-citation-unreliable-mail-online-a7570856.html

Wikipedia bans the Daily Mail as a source for being 'unreliable'

'Sensationalism and flat-out fabrication' are given as reasons for the move 

Jon Sharman 

Thursday 9 February 2017

Wikipedia editors have said they will no longer accept links to Daily Mail stories to support citations because it is too unreliable.

A fiery debate on its suitability as a source ended with a consensus view that the Mail, and Mail Online, were "generally unreliable" and their use "is to be generally prohibited, especially when other more reliable sources exist".

The statement added: "The general themes of the support votes centred on the Daily Mail's reputation for poor fact checking, sensationalism, and flat-out fabrication."

One person in favour of the ban said: "It's just a mouthpiece for Paul Dacre & I remove it on sight."

But others were strongly opposed to the move.

User The Four Deuces said: "Editors are supposed to always use judgment when choosing sources. Usually the broadsheets are better than the tabloids but there are circumstances when tabloids provide better coverage such as sports and crime. And if we exclude the Mail, there are a lot of other publications of lower quality that would still be considered reliable."

And N-HH said: "Bashing the Mail is fun, and it doesn't look as if anyone disagrees much that it is best avoided, but that there will possibly be rare occasions when it will be a good source, given the context (eg, as noted, something about the paper itself).

"But that's the point: identifying appropriate sources is all about context, and there are plenty of rubbish websites out there that should rarely or never be used, and plenty of occasions when even broadsheet reporting isn't worth much for an encyclopedia."

The editors' statement added: "If there are topics where it might be a reliable source, then better sources (without its disadvantages) should also exist and can be used instead."

Editors have asked for volunteers to comb through the thousands of citations that currently rely on links to Daily Mail stories and change them "as appropriate".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bravo 

There's a campaign against fake news and messy media and this is to celebrate. These biased media are hurting the whole world. 

If Fox News had been closed,  there wouldn't have been Tea Party support and there wouldn't be Trump. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great news.  Sick of this ghastly tabloid being quoted and it's putrid articles being used and shared so much.  It is astounding how many people seem to believe the tripe it peddles that is incorrect because it is used so much online.  Journalism should be of high standards and there should be no excuses made for incorrect information deliberately being printed as the Fail does so often. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, XXL said:

Wikipedia drops them and Theresa May hires their people. Makes sense in Wonderland

Eww, hire them for what? Can this woman sink any lower? The world sucks right now, and I mean RIGHT now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/14/2017 at 4:03 PM, mynameisdita said:

the daily mail was banned from my university's campus in London and we werent allowed to source information from it for the same resons :chuckle:

I can understand if your university doesn't want DM as source information. Just that to outright ban it from college campuses is very disturbing to me..

I've been out of university for a long time, but don't want out of touch university administrators determining what students can or can't read on campus, especially when it comes to political issues. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a huge different with Wikipedia and The Daily Fail though.  Wikipedia can and does make factual errors but tries to fix them.  The Daily Fail deliberately prints fake information and picks and chooses who they want to trash.  They are extremely hateful as well as being inaccurate. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wikipedia: internet page

Daily Mail. press that is considered facts. 

You doubt INternet, you don't doubt Newspapers. 

Bravo for Wikipedia. Besides, if newspapers nowadays had the same level of control as Wikipedia, we would be much more informed. 

About banning from the campus: YES! That "freedom of speech" discurse is harming more democracy than lies themselves. Daily Mail should be closed, because it's breaking laws regarding honour and fundamental rights. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...