Oldak Quill wrote:
We should determine if that Spectator article contains untruths and, if it does, we should ensure that a retraction is issued.
Basically we should (if anything) ask someone to write a polite letter to the editor of the Spectator, pointing out a few things:
Sir,
- it is fashionable to write certain kinds of knocking copy about WP, but we find that this can conceal lazy journalism and misunderstanding of how the site works, and there is a history of hacks fabricating stories this way; - WP has a perfectly good complaints mechanism for dealing with untruths posted on the site; - like any website, WP reserves the right to regulate what is posted and take action against those who disregard the purpose for which it is designed.
In the light of which, we think more professional courtesy should be shown than Rod Liddle has done: we have plenty of attention-seekers coming to edit Wikipedia, but we take a dim view of "bored teenager in bedroom" rampaging around on what is a public service. So a retraction of misleading comments would be appreciated.
NB The Spectator is reasonably stylish, prose-wise, so a letter written for publication should be well written.
Charles