Wikipedia bans quotations of The Daily Mail for being "generally unreliable" | Welcome to Linda Ikeji's Blog

LI_Mobile_Leaderboard_1

Friday, 10 February 2017

Wikipedia bans quotations of The Daily Mail for being "generally unreliable"

Wikipedia has barred citations of The Daily Mail after editors of the online encyclopedia concluded on February 8, 2017 that the British tabloid is "generally unreliable." 

The decision came after years of long debate over the Daily Mail's credibility among Wikipedia's active community of volunteer editors. The editors explained that the decision stemmed from "the Daily Mail's reputation for poor fact checking, sensationalism, and flat-out fabrication." 

As a result, the Daily Mail and its online offshoot have been "generally prohibited" as a reference on Wikipedia, "especially when other more reliable sources exist." 

The editors recommended installing an "edit filter" that will "warn editors attempting to use the Daily Mail as a reference." They also encouraged the volunteers to review the thousands of Daily Mail citations already on Wikipedia, and to "remove/replace them as appropriate." 

The Daily Mail is one of the UK's most commercially successful tabloids, and its website churning out upwards of 1,600 stories a day is the most-read online newspaper in the world. 

But the publication has at times been as wildly inaccurate as it is widely read. In 2014, George Clooney ripped the Daily Mail for a story claiming that the mother of Clooney's then-fiancee, Amal Alamuddin, opposed their marriage for religious reasons. The story, littered with false claims, was eventually deleted. 

Earlier this week, a lawyer for First Lady Melania Trump re-filed a lawsuit against the Daily Mail over an already-retracted story detailing claims that she used to be involved in a "high-end escort" service.

Source CNN

6 comments:

  1. Lol want a wawuu. Not good for DailyMail's reputation.


    . ~BONARIO~says so via NOKIA LUMIA

    ReplyDelete
  2. And this is where you get half of your blog posts from.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You hear Linda..That is where you quote most of your post including media takeout ..the most unreliable sources

    ReplyDelete
  4. hmm
    -D great anonymous now as Vivian Reginalds

    ReplyDelete
  5. right from time they write with extreme exaggerations and unconfirmed statements. But many people do not believe

    ReplyDelete

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the comment writers alone and does not reflect or represent the views of Linda Ikeji.

Recent Posts