[WikiEN-l] Daily Mail article on Sam Blacketer case

[Andrew Turvey]

---- "AGK" <wikiagk at googlemail.com> wrote: 
> From: "AGK" <wikiagk at googlemail.com> 
> 
> > Gross inaccuracies that harm our public image? Not that I can see. Some of 
> > the details are wrong - number of ArbCom cases for instance, but that's 
> > pretty irrelevant to the story or indeed our reputation. Likewise with the 
> > relationship between Wikimedia UK and the Foundation. 
> 
> (Belated reply to Andrew's post of one day ago.) 
> 
> The article certainly doesn't give a positive impression of us. It's quite 
> clear to me that there are inaccuracies and that the article harms our 
> public image. Wikipedia gets quite enough stick for being "totally 
> unreliable" (and such) without the Mail spreading incorrect information 
> about how we operate. 

I agree that the article gives a very bad impression of us and contains a lot of inaccuracies. However, I don't think it's the inaccuracies that give the bad impression - I'm afraid it's the underlying story which is essentially true. 

Andrew