I came across
this today in the English Wikipedia:
"In 2011, it has been reported that [the subject] has been caught
cheating
on his wife with a 30 year old intern turned reporter."
Is this worthy of a credible Encyclopedia or, if it needs reported at
all,
in a gossip tabloid rag?
Marc Riddell
on 10/7/12 9:55 AM, Fred Bauder at fredbaud(a)fairpoint.net
wrote:
Depends on reliability of the source and
notability. If the subject was
Barack Obama and the sources were The Washington Post, The New York
Times, AND The Wall Street Journal, the mere report would be
encyclopedic.
If the subject was Joe the Plumber and the source was
perezhilton.com/,
no.
Answering your specific question requires reference to the factual
situation, but, no, we are not a "gossip rag."
It was not my intention to suggest that we were a "gossip rag". It was
my
intention to suggest that we are above that.
The reliability of the source should, in this case, be irrelevant. What
should be relevant is if the subject of the report has been publicly
hypocritical concerning the issue then, yes, is should be reported. But
only
to stress the hypocrisy, not the "infidelity".
Marc