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。

Daily Mail。as a source only in limited situations.。Mashable Top StoriesStay connected with the hottest stories of the day and the latest entertainment news.Sign up for Mashable's Top Stories newsletter。

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  。

---

and the。

---

Daily Mirror。

---

are also seen as unreliable. Wikipedia also warns against using state-run media like China's Xinhua or Iran's Press TV as sources. 。Additional reporting by Jason Abbruzzese.。Featured Video For You 。Even Fox News is defending CNN against Trump。