您的当前位置:首页 >時尚 >【】as a source only in limited situations. 正文
时间:2025-01-18 19:00:00 来源:网络整理编辑:時尚
Prepare yourself for less celebrity gossip on Wikipedia.。Editors for the site (who are all volunteer
Prepare yourself for less celebrity gossip on Wikipedia. 。
Editors for the site (who are all volunteers) voted Wednesday to almost entirely ban the British tabloid newspaper the。Daily Mail 。as a source, calling the publication "generally unreliable."。
SEE ALSO:Early newspaper editions could not keep up with that legendary Super Bowl ending 。The。 Daily Mail。's reliability has been a point of contention on the user-edited encyclopedia site since 2015 if not earlier. But discussion about its efficacy as a source was revived in early January when one user led the campaign against the 。 Daily Mail 。Daily Mail 。
.。
Editor Hillbillyholiday argued during a discussion that the outlet is untrustworthy for science-related stories, inappropriately posts photos of children and has limited credibility even with direct quotes and interviews. 。 Those opposed could not support a blanket banning but agreed on a comprise: to use the。Those opposed could not support a blanket banning but agreed on a comprise: to use the。
By signing up you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. 。 By signing up you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.。Thanks for signing up!。
One user commented with a "strong oppose" comment that "The 。Daily Mail 。
, as hated as it is, is a very mixed bag. It can contain wonderful information such as accurate and informative interviews with highly respected people."。 The Daily Mail was dragged through the mud on a Wikipedia discussion about its reliability.Credit: Steve Meddle/REX/Shutterstock。 Ultimately, though, the news outlet has been effectively banned as a source, due to its "reputation for poor fact checking, sensationalism, and flat-out fabrication."。
The Wikimedia Foundation, who runs the main Wiki site, pointed out that the outlet isn't fully banned -- its use as a reference is just "generally prohibited, especially when other more reliable sources exist.” But the key takeaway is that the。 Daily Mail。Daily Mail 。
is no longer a go-to reliable source for citing something on a page. 。 The ruling does not mean the 。Mail。 can never be used as a source, but editors are being encouraged to change information that cites the publication to a different source.。 The。 Mail 。joins the。 National Enquirer 。among the few outlets that Wikipedia has called out in particular. 。
The Sun 。
Plane makes emergency landing after engine rips apart during flight2025-01-18 18:35
An ode to 'MadMaze': Prodigy's greatest game2025-01-18 18:30
'Plus One' is the rom2025-01-18 18:06
Senate bill would force big tech to reveal the value of your personal data2025-01-18 18:06
Did our grandparents have the best beauty advice?2025-01-18 18:05
Seafaring drone crashes into iceberg, still sails around Antarctica2025-01-18 17:54
Here is why Jar Jar Binks is trending on Twitter2025-01-18 17:41
What Intel's 10th2025-01-18 17:13
Fiji wins first2025-01-18 16:35
Nuro autonomous vehicles will deliver Domino's pizza2025-01-18 16:20
'The Flying Bum' aircraft crashes during second test flight2025-01-18 18:43
Pixar's 'Soul': Story, art, and cast revealed at D232025-01-18 18:38
Apple Card has its own Twitter account2025-01-18 18:17
Rare butterflies start their once2025-01-18 17:37
Researchers create temporary tattoos you can use to control your devices2025-01-18 17:27
Sony's new wireless earbuds will kill the noise around you2025-01-18 17:18
Bam Bam the dog steals the show at Ubisoft's E3 press conference2025-01-18 17:07
Chaos erupts after a misheard bid for a rare Porsche at auction2025-01-18 17:01
Xiaomi accused of copying again, this time by Jawbone2025-01-18 16:47
Put these keywords in your YouTube video title if you want more views2025-01-18 16:41