| Congrats on being an excellent example of why leftists should never be allowed anywhere near anything important, especially not Wikipedia. You could have cited ANY story from the long history of the Daily Mail to demonstrate some kind of inaccuracy. It would have been only a single data point and not that useful, but you could have done it. But like always with this claim by the left, you picked a story that is fully accurate. In fact it's just a retelling of a medical case report written by doctors: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21834723/ There's nothing inaccurate in the Daily Mail's coverage of this story. Instead: - You reacted to the headline for dumb aesthetic reasons - You made assumptions instead of checking - You engaged in nonsensical ad hominem attacks. The New York Times famously ran interference for Stalin. Do you consider that questionable history to disqualify all NYT coverage for Wikipedia too? Your response is a perfect encapsulation of the problem that Wikipedians have. Like all leftists you aren't actually concerned about accuracy, you just hate any news source not controlled by your ideological allies, and want to censor them all out of existence. |