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 gen
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 move is highly unusual for the online encyclopaedia, which rarely puts in place a blanket ban on publications and which still allows links to sources such as Kremlin backed news organisation Russia Today, and Fox News, both of which have raised concern among editors. 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.
The Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia but does not control its editing processes, said in a statement that volunteer editors on English Wikipedia had discussed the reliability of the Daily Mail since at least early 2015.
It said: “Based on the requests for comments section, volunteer editors on English Wikipedia have come to a consensus that the Daily Mail is generally unreliable and its use as a reference is to be generally prohibited, especially when other more reliable sources exist.
“This means that the ‘Daily Mail’ will generally not be referenced as a reliable source on English Wikipedia, and volunteer editors are encouraged to change existing citations to the ‘Daily Mail’ to another source deemed reliable by the community. This is consistent with how Wikipedia editors evaluate and use media outlets in general – with common sense and caution.”
Fellow editors had also weighed in with arguments for and against the ban over the past month. Those who opposed the move said the ‘Daily Mail’ was sometimes reliable, that historically its record may have been better, and that there were other publications that were also unreliable.
A spokesman for ‘Daily Mail’ Newspapers said: “It is hard to know whether to laugh or cry at this move by Wikipedia. For the record the ‘Daily Mail’ banned all its journalists from using Wikipedia as a sole source in 2014 because of its unreliability.
“Last year, the ‘Daily Mail’ and ‘Mail Online’ together published more than half a million stories and yet received just two upheld adjudications each for inaccuracy from the UK industry’s regulator IPSO.
“All those people who believe in freedom of expression should be profoundly concerned at this cynical politically motivated attempt to stifle the free press.”
