10194:
Yifrah) in this publication or other publications should be considered completely unreliable. In general, even without these issues, the UK-based Jewish
Chronicle is unlikely to be a good source on the Middle East unless the article is provided by someone with specific expertise (e.g. by Colin Shindler, one of the writers who resigned this week). The issues are: total opacity about ownership since 2020; an editor with no prior experience of news media since 2021; extent of bias under current editor spinning into unreliability (in particular on the issues of Israel/Palestine and Muslims/Islam). I would oppose designating it unreliable for the pre-2020 period, as these issues were not present (the non-upheld IPSO complaints mentioned above are not a reason for that). I would also be wary about declaring it, even in its current incarnation, generally unreliable, because that will mean its routine coverage of UK Jewish community matters or political issues in the UK of Jewish interest will be lost, including important material relating to antisemitism which is less well reported elsewhere.
3989:(linked earlier), which was a rather complicated discussion about what is a very tiny amount of actual usable sources (exactly 2 scholars that investigate the topic directly, iirc). You're correct that almost every English-language news article is essentially recycling Lockley, which is academically sourced to his one book. The result of the RfC afaik of the pertinent questions is that "it's more complicated than a simple yes/no" (regarding implying a particular definition of 'samurai' across several centuries in particular, wrt what seems the most controversial issue here) and that one or two academics summarizing it is fine because only one or two academics have ever studied it in detail, and their assessments (not their separate speculations) were not particularly controversial, even if quoted from a pop book or their (expert-written) CNN article instead of/in parallel with their academic papers. Either way, if the source
10990:"bunch of us, this was too little too late." "We felt that there had not been editorial standards applied to this journalist because that journalist was adhering to an ideology that perhaps was similar to that of the editorial board." Freeman said she chose to join the JC to represent the "liberal modern voice" of British Jews, who she claimed largely support a Jewish state but want a two-state solution. However, she said, "it felt increasingly that the JC represented a more ideological rather than a strictly journalistic point of view, and was becoming far more right-wing and far more in step with Netanyahu, which most British Jews are not." She also reiterated the concerns of other journalists regarding the identity of the JC's owner.
4693:, but the news sources that Tinynanorobots is removing (CNN, TIME, Smithsonian Magazine) haven't been contradicted by any scholarly sources. These sources either support non-controversial content ("Yasuke was also granted servants according to Thomas Lockley"; "He was granted a sword, a house and a stipend", "In 1968, author Yoshio Kurusu and artist GenjirĆ Mita published a children's book about Yasuke"; "Yasuke was the inspiration for Takashi Okazaki's Afro Samurai franchise") or contentious content that is also supported by reliable academic sources ("Yasuke was a man of African origin who served as a samurai"). There is literally no reason to remove these sources, as they align with and do not conflict with academic ones.
4499:
Most "news" isnât investigative journalism. A lot of it is interviews or relies on press releases, by people who donât specialize in it and have to produce something every day. A news article from 40 years ago about the
Falklands war should probably be seen as a primary source. A news article written about the Falklands War today, would probably be a reflection piece, and lean towards being human interest. A book written by an investigative journalist would be more useful. However, I think a historian writing on the Falklands War would be better. It is a case by case basis, using common sense and consensus.
6973:, and not the other way around.) I still don't see how one can know that the motivation was culture war based. My reading of Boaler's work is that it is primarily concerned with pedagogy and curriculum, with culture war themes, if present at all, a distant second. The main issues in this controversy cut across political boundaries and relate to tracking, acceleration, student-directed vs. teacher-directed approaches to instruction, but most importantly, to curriculum choices, in particular data science vs. algebra II. Opposition came from all parts of the political spectrum, as, unfortunately, did the
5452:
claims being more appropriate to cite from his peer reviewed scholarly work elsewhere, was unsuitable for citing on the page and should be replaced with higher quality sources. The RfC also concluded that
Lockley constituted a reliable source, it is just that this one book is a problem that is best avoided entirely since little is lost from doing so. Since the closure of that RSN, the page has been changed to reflect it by directly attributing Lockley's theories from his more academic peer reviewed work and the page is significantly better off for doing so.
9692:). Either of those could be a cutoff date, or the 2020 ownership change, or the 2021 IPSO internal alert again. But a precise cutoff has not been necessary for RSP -- just saying on RSP "2020, around the time ownership change with major issues appearing the year beforehand", is plenty enough guidance for editors. Or whatever year you want, it doesn't matter -- absent a complete staff and editorial overhaul in a single day, there's never such a precise transition of reliability.
10159:
of any article ever written by the source from ever being used for anything is not a good response to this situation, the issues being raised are ones that are due to recent changes (deprecation is just unreliable with an edit filter plus bells and whistles, it doesn't work with any kind of restrictions on topic area or time). I would suggest any issues prior to these dates be handled separately, as the arguements are quite different and often backed up by other sources. --
7459:
2797:
2534:
4096:
with accusations of TRUTHFINDER!. The sources used for the RfC were mostly pop journalist write-ups of
LockleyÂŽs book. The RfC was mostly resolved because there is no evidence that any expert thinks that Yasuke is not a samurai. Some are just less sure, or wouldnât use samurai for any Sengoku warrior. I am not trying to overturn the consensus. The debate over whether the article needs to cite 3-4 news sources that mostly rely on Lockley and were written years ago.
7471:
6919:
be quick to assume that the complaint was motivated by hostility to equity. The progressive critics of the framework claim that its proposals would harm equity. Given some of the tactics some of those critics used in attacking Boaler personally, it is not hard to imagine that the complaint could have come from one of them. It could also have come from some politically neutral party with strong opinions about mathematics education or about research practices.
2809:
2546:
4954:; if editors could just say "this source is wrong, therefore it is unreliable", they could dismiss any source that says anything they disagree with, making it impossible to ever convince them of anything at all. That doesn't mean that we necessarily have to mindlessly repeat errors in a source (there are some options, like finding newer or higher-quality sources that disagree with it.) But "this specific piece is riddled with errors!" isn't a valid
12358:
release. I'd say this is completely expected to post a feature update on a planned release, and two seasons beforehand, to not yet raise a fuss that it cannot release on schedule (not sure when the blog may have started doing that, but it's irrelevant). The
Knowledge article meanwhile took a blog talking about a planned release date, and used it as a source to verify the actual now-past released date. That's the WP editor's fault, not phoronix's.
9719:
outlet seems to be taking the appropriate steps but we should keep an eye on it. There are other outlets who have had similar controversies and ownership (cough Al
Jazeera cough) but are considered to be generally reliable if biased on certain topics. Without a more comprehensive evaluation of any failed fact checks, this one issue isn't any more damning of the entire paper than similar issues in the New York Times.
3659:
claim, because the citations have been moved from one claim to another, and ended up attached to a non-contested claim that at one point had four inline citations. Does the fact that it is in CNN Travel matter? I think it would be considered Human interest and therefore less reliable? Also, the article appears 90Â % based on
Lockley, who had just written a book at the time. So does that count as churnalism?
11701:
and domestic political corruption are of far more interest to the average
British reader and are more likely to generate complaints. The bottom line is that the JC keep making the most blatant mistakes, so they keep getting caught out. This industry is something of a revolving door. This makes the IPSO a very weak regulator and reluctant to criticise their own. They reject 99% of complaints on average.
14298:. The user involved in the dispute has put forward the syllabus to try and substantiate a claim that not all Geji engaged in sex-work, but I don't think the syllabus supports that claim, and the claim is also at odds with the scholar's academic book that says they provide sexual entertainment. The syllabus is from a 2010 course, the book was published in 2018. Likewise, in their 2001 Book, the scholar
4382:
events that are mentioned in passing in newspaper articles are also not reliable. The only times that history in a newspaper should be considered reliable are (1) an article written by a historian or known expert, (2) an article by a journalist who directly quotes a historian or known expert. I've seen too many cases of historical errors being introduced from newspapers to suggest a weaker criterion.
9534:
stuck with it even as it departed from the traditions that built its reputation as the worldâs oldest Jewish newspaper. âThe latest scandal brings great disgrace on the paper â publishing fabricated stories and showing only the thinnest form of contrition â but this is only the latest. Too often, the JC reads like a partisan ideological instrument, its judgements political rather than journalistic.â
8810:
9506:, so the key is to determine whether this has impacted their overarching reputation or whether it was just one incident. High-quality sources that establish that it is part of a pattern would be particularly useful; it might also be useful to find sources that help us identify a specific point in time where things changed and the source's coverage became less reliable, since it is so old. --
4064:
history book is useless -- just cite the pop history book -- that's what pop history is for (except for getting online text for verification, in which case, cite both in parallel). There's no need for another RfC -- they decided these historians were reliable enough in the previous one, and they settled how to say the most controversial claim in the article. Just use the sources there.
4700:). The aim was to prevent edit warring/disruptive editing by clarifying that the content about Yasuke's status as a samurai is well-supported by sources, while also providing readers with a collection of news sources for those interested in how Yasuke has been represented in the popular press - an important aspect of the "Yasuke case". This proposal was rejected by Tinynanorobots (
10320:. Chances are we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg because 94% of complaints are rejected, 0.3% are upheld and 5.3% are abandoned or never investigated. This isn't surprising because The Press Recognition Panel (the body which audits press regulators for independence and effectiveness) has referred to IPSO as a âtrade complaint handling body with no independent oversight
9080:""Of course, all newspapers make mistakes and run articles that writers on the paper dislike," Freedland wrote. "The problem in this case is that there can be no real accountability because the JC is owned by a person or people who refuse to reveal themselves. As you know, I and others have long urged transparency, making that case to you privately â but nothing has happened."
14083:
studies debunking it. The current article doesn't talk about the symptoms associated with
Adrenal fatigue. I don't feel like the approach of "Adrenal fatigue isn't real so it has no symptoms" is very helpful. Ideally I would like to write about the symptoms that have been associated with adrenal fatigue but of course continue to maintain that it has no scientific basis.
4422:
history begins whenever someone publishes the first academic paper... But for wikipedia's purposes history would appear to start when the first reliable non-primary source is published. If by history you just mean that news sources will be less reliable about older stuff, well duh... Thats already baked into our preferance for academic sources.
9277:: If you have a Haaretz subscription, your user account works for both language versions. You simply have to log in again on the Hebrew side, using the same account details. I logged in and checked â there is no added sentence at the end of the article in the live version either. The date, too, just says 20 October 2023 (no exact time given).
3376:, from a look at the source itâs clearly of extremely low quality and seems to just make stuff up. The site decided for us that brown dwarfs are actually definitely stars and calls them brown stars. It says thereâs no evidence NGC 474 contains planets and that a wormhole would be required to visit it. We use that page as a source right now.
6431:
8585:
relate to the period of 2017-20. Some of these upheld breaches are only partially upheld. They range, for both papers, from very small to more significant. 12 relate to accuracy. All 12 of those relate to the two topics of a huge proportion of JC news coverage in the period: the
British left (almost all of them) and/or British Muslims.
3243:, but was unable to make an RfC here because of personal issues back at home. One of my main issues with this website is this appears too often in Google searches, so it is inevitable it would be blindly used as a source. This is clearly a source written by a non-expert, and even makes its way to very prominent articles like
10457:
also be given to the opinions of journalistic professionals in academia. I'm unsure if Knowledge rules already specify this, but should an editor arriving at an opinion based on a professional or reliable source, be given more weight in an RfC than one just saying 'I agree with X' or 'I think it's unreliable or reliable'?
11491:; that is, we survey what high-quality secondary sources say about it and determine its reputation from that. This means that we shouldn't update a source's reliability based on one event unless coverage is such that it makes it obvious that their overall reputation has been impacted. When it come to Al Jazeera, though,
3540:
case, CNN Travel is not even correctly portraying what Lockley says. There are other errors, and the general tone of the article is non-academic. Every time I remove the citation, it is added to some uncontested claim in order to add weight. Other more academic sources have been removed in order to insert news sources.
9596:"A slim, weekly publication, the Jewish Chronicle has been found by IPSO to have breached the Editors Code of Conduct 33 times in three years. In the same period it has admitted libel on four occasions, paying damages and publishing apologies. This is a failure of standards on a scale not witnessed by IPSO before."
10139:
the noise. An anonymous owner is no better than an anonymous editorial board, which would usually be a red flag. Itâs a broken chain of accountability. JC articles from after April 2020 (apparently the date of the takeover) should be treated with utmost caution. No opinion on articles from before that date.
10442:. We could not reach a conclusion that it was reliable, and that is the current default. Low and behold, a few years down the line the paper becomes embroiled in a scandal due to publishing false information on precisely the topics we judged it unreliable on. Why exactly are we bothering with this source?
13749:
These are likely reliable, but if something is due for inclusion is a NPOV issue not one of reliability. That something can be verified doesn't mean it must be included, rather if something is included it must be verifiable. I would suggest anyone interested in the question should comment in the RFC.
13365:
I had a much longer reply, but I scrapped it. Going over all the issues raised in prior discussions isn't really going to be helpful. The depreciation of the source isn't political but these are poor examples of the reasons why. The issue isn't their bias or minor mistakes, they are not trusted as a
12943:
I agree with above statements that NBA is subject of widespread coverage in some serious RS, think SI.com, etc. I dont think we should consider a lesser source like to be eligible to go toe-to-toe with a real RS. Lets call this more of blog type UGC site, that has some policies (no idea of true). But
12903:. Also if they operate in the same way as SB Nation then they are not reliable. SB Nation also has nice pages about editorial controls but if you look into the facts each content moderator has to oversee multiple different amateur blogs. This isn't want is meant by editorial control and oversight. --
12474:
Is the story about getting an internship misleading or factually incorrect? Is a free-circulation newspaper suddenly a marker of unreliability (even though it's a sustainable business model for metro newspapers across the world, including very reliable and prestigious ones)? What is a "random store"?
12437:
Satish Kumar, President of Vedic Hindu Cultural Society of BC that manages Surrey's Shri Lakshmi Narayan Mandir, apologized to the community after a letter he wrote on September 4 to the Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre objecting to the visit of his Sikh MPs to the temple on the occasion of
11716:
I would argue we wait to see the results of the internal investigation and the actions taken thereafter before we re-assess the JC as a source. Talks of deprecation are way to extreme, in the worst case it should surely be reducing the level of reliability we place on the JC either in regards to I-P,
11700:
Then there's an excuse of low sales, but high numbers of complaints from low sales is worse not better because fewer people have read it to complain. Despite the reporting topic being emotive, antisemitism and Israel aren't the main contentious topics for British newspapers. Immigration, the economy
11265:
I think something like this is right, but might need to untangle more as it will be difficult to close. (a) Potential cut-offs are current editor (2021+), new ownership (2020+), period of Corbyn leadership, the topic of all of the IPSO complaints (2015-20), previous + current editor (2008+). (b) some
10989:
Speaking on the BBC Radio 4 "Today" program on Monday morning, said that, like every journalist, she does not agree with everything in her publication, but that this was a tipping point. While she acknowledged the deletion of the articles by Elon Perry - which she called "wild" - she said that for a
10920:
but by "AI/IP" you mean antisemitism, Islamophobia, Israel and Palestine? (Personally, I think it would be a big mistake to make it unreliable for antisemitism before 2020, given that as more or less the only regular UK Jewish newspaper until 2020 it was the only media source with full coverage of UK
10522:
since they care to be neutral and take concrete steps to do so. That is all we really can ask at wikipedia. Our OR and POV on the rest of if we like a source or not is pretty hard to sort though. Again, I know nearly nothing about Israeli politics, so please take my statement with a grain of salt and
10412:
My concern is that we could use evidence of misconduct that is no different from any other publication to ban some publications, but not others. For example, the Jewish Chronicle has had four breaches upheld against it by the IPSO in the last two years, which is the same number as the Times, although
10012:
It has been asked above about what papers do in this situation, and it seems usual that they do extensive reporting on what went wrong, what was false or can't be confirmed, and who was involved. The reporting is in depth investigation and done by journalists (usually senior journalists) and editors
8788:
Thanks that's really helpful. Good spot on the different domains. So, the questions are: 1/ are the breaches relating to articles published under the new ownership (i.e. since April 2020) serious enough for us to downgrade reliability in this period? (my take: possibly, but the real clinchers are the
8209:
Founded in 1841, the JC â as it is familiarly known â has long been a respected institution in British Jewish life, attracting prominent Jewish journalists and writers to contribute. But the recent events have caused consternation about the direction of the paper as it has drifted further right under
7798:
I think having sat on the fence, I should cast my !vote. Had it been an isolated incident, I would have agreed with the above for option 2. However, based upon the evidence that I found that it has happened again (even after I informed them of the plagiarism), that suggests that it would be better to
7780:
Its news stories attributed to journalists seem largely reliable, or at least no worse than many other outlets we trust. However, we need to be aware of the possibility of wiki-mirroring in these articles. There also appears to be incipient AI use which may require further discussion if more examples
7101:
The Fox article does contain details about Boaler's response to the complaint that I haven't seen anywhere else, for example her claim that the complaint was padded to make it appear to encompass a larger body of work than it actually does. These details don't appear to be suitable for Knowledge, but
6918:
I think you need to provide supporting evidence for this statement: "This is quite clearly a culture wars political issue: going after a scholar with anonymous attacks because she promotes racial equity in STEM." Having paid close attention to the dispute over the framework as it unfolded I would not
6878:
To say that "Boaler has been the target of politically motivated attacks, with the California mathematics framework being used by the right wing as a proxy for DEI in their culture war" is a misleading oversimplification. The criticism of the framework came from across the political spectrum and some
6327:
The question was why does FOXNEWSPOLITICS apply, and I was explaining why I think this is a political issue rather than a story about academic integrity. There's a fuzzy line between political, cultural, and academic issues, particularly in the United States where education has become centered in the
5690:
This is a massive non-story, and pretty clealry exemplifies why we don't use Fox. Fox created a controversy over a "report" (i.e., 100 pages of anonymous ranting that was probably thrown in the trash by the Stanford administration) and then asked for comment. It was dumb of Boaler to engage with Fox,
4464:
Sorry, I thought you were being reductio absurdium, but not I see that you were thinking like that. I think this is something that common sense, should be able to solve. Unfortunately, people forget that is allowed on wikipedia. There might even be an essay on history vs. the news. I think one litmus
4381:
Travel guides and travel articles in newspapers are notoriously unreliable for history and should not be used. Not only that, but typically the writer has taken information from random places including Knowledge. One of the most common errors is to uncritically report traditions as facts. Historical
4274:
I get the feeling that you are saying gotcha, but I donât get your point. I made the efforts to find those diffs because you asked for them. There are additional changes, but they are unrelated to the citation change. Pretty much all the sources use "samurai" to describe Yasuke, so changing from one
4239:
I am not sure what your point is about the Jesuit sources, of course it is supposed to be the primary sources. There are not that many primary sources about Yasuke, so it is easy to keep track of them. Some are written by Jesuits, but Lockley cites Ćta GyĆ«ich as the source for the statement about the
3514:
This is not particularly complicated. Secondary scholarly/rigorous work supercedes non-secondary and/or non-scholarly/rigorous work in WP generally. It's not that Lockley's book is not a RS generally; it's that it would seem that anything in there that isn't verifiable in the scholarship generally is
3430:
article. It is a topic which has received a lot more coverage in the popular press than in academic sources. However, it keeps coming up in every discussion that there are news sources that cover the topic, and that if anything goes against them, it goes against the majority view. This has conflicted
2685:
The use in that article is just 'he said, she said'. It could be reliable in a primary attributed way (if the opinion is even due), but for that use you could just use the original social media post. It doesn't appear to add anything beyond the original social media posts, so using it in the way it's
2619:
Twitchy does at least have Editors, but the description ('Twitchy is a ground-breaking social media curation site powered by a kinetic staff of social media junkies. We mine Twitter to bring you âwho said whatâ in U.S. & global news, sports, entertainment, media, and breaking news 24/7.') doesn't
14390:
appeal. It doesn't say they didn't provide them. Then when the editor added them to the article, they displaced the 2018 academic book. As I said, I am of the mind that the source shouldn't be used at all given the academic scholarship that exists, but I wanted to see what the opinions of others was
14376:
a user inserted the syllabus in the lead of the article. Another editor removed it. The editor who added it had also used it as evidence in a dispute that the article should say not all Geji were sex workers. I wasn't sure what the stance of Knowledge was on the reliability of a course syllabus as a
14319:
In general, I would say that syllabuses, and other similar documents (e.g. lesson plans), are not reliable for anything other than perhaps as primary sources on the content of the course. Certainly, they would not be reliable for definitive statements of fact in the lead section of an article on any
13606:
and many many more.) Even if it were the case, it is my understanding that the Ordnance Survey data is accepted as the best generally available data for geographic information in the UK and that the data collected by enthusiasts with modern GPS equipment doesn't trump that for Knowledge as is is not
12357:
Hey I gotta point out that in the diff you provided (and the fact correction you explain), phoronix was not actually incorrect. It is the WP article's fault for misrepresenting and misusing the source. Note the phoronix blog post is March 2021, discussing a feature added in 41 for its planned autumn
11958:
are presumed reliable is that they have some kind of oversight. That being said, is anyone actually citing Phoronix and what articles? I mean, they are, because I just checked and people are citing it a lot for open source press releases, of exactly the kind that this user is bringing up. However, I
11583:
saying "What has shocked close observers is how little curiosity and due diligence the Jewish Chronicle applied to Perry, a writer who âappeared out of nowhereâ â and who most staff had never encountered â with a series of extraordinary âintelligence scoopsâ despite having no visible track record in
11317:
According to the column in the Independent, Sir Robbie Gibb, who says that he owns the Jewish Chronicle, has been appointed by the BBC to investigate its coverage of Gaza. By focusing on the Chronicle, we are missing the big picture. How reliable is mainstream Western media in reporting on political
9881:
Also, DYK that Murdoch owns both the Times and the Sun? It does not matter who owns a newspaper but where it follows journalistic standards. And I don't get btw why the BBC should be considered less reliable than the Sun, because the Sun is owned by an individual person while the BBC is owned by the
8584:
Andreas I think you're not scrolling through the pages. There's 4 to a page. Times has 30 upheld breaches going back to 2015, JC has 13 in the same period, of which I think 4 (those you list above - the first page, of chronologically newest hits) are from the period of current ownership; I believe 9
8535:
The IPSO issues have been discussed exhaustively on the JC's talk page, and my strong view is that this is not a reason for deprecation or gunrel status. Cathcart in Byline Times is attacking JC as a way of attacking IPSO, which is indeed flawed but if we accept this as a reason to downgrade JC we'd
8311:
The British media has a strong anti-Palestine bias, this does not make it unreliable. The JC has a record of massive factual inaccuracy unparalleled in British journalism. Although the media was horrendously biased during the Corbyn years, only the JC breached IPSO's code 15 times in two years. That
8292:
There should be a guideline on investigative journalism, but it is mostly covered by extraordinary claims: "Any exceptional claim requires multiple high-quality sources." As a rule, I would not use original investigative articles, but look at other publications that have picked up on them. That will
8241:
It's worth noting that at the minute no consensus exists that the JC is reliable on the British left and Muslims, after an extraordinary series of false stories in a short period of time, which coincided with Jeremy Corbyn's leadership of the Labour Party. I think we need to stop using the JC, as it
8217:
The removal of the articles, after an investigation formally announced by the paper only the day before, raises serious questions for JC editor Wallis Simons, a former novelist who has written for the Mail, the Telegraph and Spectator. Despite being provided with a series of questions, Wallis Simons
7391:
to me. These fringe left and right so called publications, which are just PR sites (think Breitbart) are not useful for us to reach NPOV, all we get is false balance. These far right and left websites are just laughable. Unicorn riot (as I type and the first time I have ever visited or heard of the
6346:
Again, you're going to have to come up with some kind of policy rationale for treating regular news content as political if it's not explicitly labelled as politics. Going with your gut doesn't pass muster, especially when you make unsourced claims like: "going after a scholar with anonymous attacks
4759:
Which did not seem to come to any real conclusion, and which (to a degree) seemed to have the same issue as this discussion, it meandered all over the place, going so far as to claim that because some of his work was peer review this made this book RS (nor does it seem to have been an RFC). So maybe
3539:
I couldnât find the quote from the book African Samurai, but Lockley believes that Nobunaga was an atheist or at least not very devout, which I understand is in line with other scholarship. The connection between buddha statues and black skin is LockleyÂŽs opinion, no other scholar says this. In this
12611:
This is in reply to Andromedean question, rather than the source in general. It didn't get a reliable rating, as that's not how it generally works. Editors are expected to use their own good judgement on whether a source is reliable (based on policy). Discussions like this, and RFCs, only happen if
11835:
The guidelines are clear enough to disqualify it as an RS at a glance, and I don't think anyone would argue otherwise. I dunno if AWB scripts can just put bsn tags on it if bot editors won't otherwise bother to check for the original source material of the blog, though, given that's what it's being
10456:
I would certainly agree to a more objective process. For example a table of breaches, court judgements etc so they can be examined more clearly. However, we must also allow for more subjective criteria such as transparency, ownership and journalistic reputation of staff. Substantial weight should
10299:
The Committee expressed significant concerns about the newspaperâs handling of this complaint. The newspaper had failed, on a number of occasions, to answer questions put to it by IPSO and it was regrettable the newspaperâs responses had been delayed. The Committee considered that the publicationâs
10158:
that began in December 2021. Their articles after April 2020 (per Barnards.tar.gz above) should be handled with scepticism, especially in the IP conflict area. Ownership isn't the issue, but the issues seem to stem from the change in ownership. Just to note from a technical perspective deprecation
9666:
The Committee expressed significant concerns about the newspaperâs handling of this complaint. The newspaper had failed, on a number of occasions, to answer questions put to it by IPSO and it was regrettable the newspaperâs responses had been delayed. The Committee considered that the publicationâs
9533:
Freedland, a columnist at the JC since 1998, began his resignation letter by stating his deep family connection to the newspaper. âMy attachment to the JC runs very deep,â he wrote. âI have been a columnist since 1998. My late father started writing for the JC in 1951. That bond explains why I have
5455:
The CNN article is just a case of a journalist (Emiko Jozuka) without a background in history uncritically taking African Samurai's narrative at face value. The book features many claims which have no means of verification, are in no sources, and are largely conjecture such as the role of Yasuke in
5058:
Of course, some news sources are unreliable (conflicts of interest, lack of neutrality, lack of editorial oversight, etc) so that is where editors should express due diligence. Note that a lack of editorial oversight is not the same thing as Knowledge personally editors disagreeing with the content
4811:
is not a reliable source. By the author's own admission, much of it is fictional. In fact, our Yasuke article does not cite the book. But this doesn't mean that Lockley is not a subject-matter expert, that his other publications don't qualify as reliable sources, or that news sources citing Lockley
4081:
Except that won't work. People have tried to just cite the pop history book, it gets reverted. It is basically never ending, one side will try to add something and it will get reverted. The other side will try to add something, it will get reverted. One claims "unreliable", the other yells "against
4003:
Thank you for your answer, but I donât understand it. You didnât finish your last sentence. Also, I donât think this has to do with YasukeÂŽs status as a samurai. The CNN article not only states speculation as fact, it contradicts LockleyÂŽs book and the article he wrote for Britannica. It also seems
13593:
A new user is using hill-bagging.co.uk to change the heights and relative heights of hills and mountains in Wales by asserting that the information used in this web-site is more accurate than Ordnance survey and is acknowledged as being more accurate than Ordnance Survey. I can find no evidence of
13101:
The claim in question is apparently the main thing the article subject is known for and its basis for notability. I see several other sources on the page that appear to make the same claim based on their titles. Is there a reason why we can't simply use one or two of the article's best sources for
10593:
As I said before, I think we should Deprecate The Jewish Chronicle for anything related to Israel/Palestine. I would also support deprecation for "UK politics biographies of living persons" (if other publications discuss BLP claims made in The Jewish Chronicle, they can be cited instead, with a JC
10138:
Inclined to agree that the opaque ownership is an even bigger problem than the specific instance of false reporting. Most publications have bias, and many have disreputable owners, but at least when the owners are known we can understand and weigh that bias, and still manage to extract signal from
9451:
The fact that a massive scandal is causing a massive shakeup is, again, exactly what one would expect out of a generally reliable source. (No source should be used without a minimum of critical judgement, mind you, and is subject to cross-verification.) I suppose in this overall time period of the
8984:
Well, we donât know. But imagine a mystery foreign backer with a plausible British frontman buying the Telegraph, on condition that his identity be kept schtum. There would, rightly, be a parliamentary hue and cry about their background and motives. One of those involved in the Gibb-led consortium
8296:
The source Boynamedsue provides (Byline Times) to discredit the Jewish Chronicle has a whole series of articles where it accuses mainstream media of bias and inaccuracy called "The Crisis in British Journalism." Mainstream coverage of both the Israel-Palestine conflict and Corbyn's ties to alleged
8118:
The Jewish Chronicle has concluded a thorough investigation into freelance journalist Elon Perry, which commenced after allegations were made about aspects of his record. While we understand he did serve in the Israel Defense Forces, we were not satisfied with some of his claims. We have therefore
6754:
There have also been some questions about whether or not the coverage of the incident in question rises to the level required for inclusion. We have not dug into that deeply, however the broad coverage in the mainstream press and educational press establishes it as more than just an internal issue
5631:
because the article uses the word "equity". While the article is published under the media section of the website, the claim here is that the use of any topic deemed to be political is sufficient for excluding content sourced to Fox News. In this case, Fox News is one of the few mainstream sources
5430:
I do not think that the word samurai should be excluded from the article. I have replaced a source that just uses the word samurai, with one that explicitly says that Yasuke is a samurai. There is a case for preferring the word Bushi, but that is off topic. I have actually added extra sources that
5411:
the difference between the author being reliable for historical fact, the book being reliable for historical fact, the newspaper covering a book being reliable for historical fact, and news sources in gen being reliable for historical fact seems like a case of trying to justify some argument about
5155:
depends on what precisely we are verifying when we cite a news source. News sources are great for basic historical facts (such as verifying that X event occured on Y date) but they are not really appropriate for analysis or for verifying conclusions. They often suffer from RECENTISM and so are not
4095:
The problem with LockleyÂŽs book is that it contains dramatization, and it is hard to know what is historical fiction and what is LockleyÂŽs theory. We could probably figure it out by comparing the content in the book with other sources, such as interviews, but every attempt to discuss that is meant
3746:
pardon, I see this has already been discussed a bit by SamuelRiv & Slatersteven above; still worth emphasizing, IMO -- these, I think, clearly show that "unless it says 'the sky is red', we cannot use any reasoning about it whatsoever" is far too limited a criterion. It is not impermissible to
14353:
Also, I do not understand your question. It's either a non-question (yes we don't like syllabi, yes we favor academic sources, obviously), or you actually have a particular piece of content that you are referring to in the massive diff for which these books, and their dates, are important. If the
14323:
I note also, and share, the concern about the comparative age of the two sources (syllabus & academic book), and suggest that we should prefer the later, more reliable, source. Also suggest that any article content should cleave strong to the source content; which I am not sure the use of the
12755:
can sometimes help absent other evidence, but it's not a prerequisite for reliability, and in this topic area, sources seem to gravitate towards primary sources like nba.com and basketball-reference.com (rather than fellow secondary sources) for stats out of simplicity and convenience. As to your
10668:
If we banned all these source there would be none left and therefore we could not cover current events at all. However using in-text attribution where appropriate and not including material that lacks weight for inclusion, these articles can be as accurate as mainstream media without a culling of
9718:
A single instance of flawed reporting doesn't impugn the source's reliability unless it can be shown to be systemic. See the New York Times, which also has controversial views of their ownership (see Biden vs Trump) and it also is relevant how the outlet deals with the coverage. In this case, the
8814:
For another comparison, "Mail Online" had 28 IPSO rulings identifying breaches since 2020, "Daily Mail" had 14, for a total of 42. Again, I suspect that is considerably less per article than The Jewish Chronicle. I think we need to come up with some RfC options ... Any ideas how we can keep it as
5878:
Voorts has a good point. IF the allegations have been widely reported (and thus DUE to mention) THEN her rebuttal is relevant and Fox can essentially be cited as an ABOUTSELF statement on her part. HOWEVER, if Fox is the only outlet to report on the allegations then the entire thing is UNDUE and
5247:
I remember a case long ago where a "historical fact" about a village was cited to a newspaper, but when I looked at the newspaper I found it was a comment in passing in a cooking article. I hope nobody here would consider that reliable. The point is that the reliability doesn't depend just on how
4498:
Yes, those are border cases, and probably would need to be discussed on a case by case basis. Knowledge policy on breaking news addresses this somewhat. Part of common sense is understanding what skills are needed to understand the subject and what techniques the journalist or historian is using.
3658:
What do I say to an editor that ignores all arguments about context? The editor that disagrees with me has a similar interpretation wikipolicy as Slatersteven. I would say, more extreme. Suggesting only in cases of fraud or CoI can a source be questioned. In this case, it isnât about a particular
14480:
I don't think it's reliable in this context. This is an opening statement of of the course, which obviously will cover the details in more detail and context. The source is being used to define Geji only as only as performing artists, the source only says that the appeal of Geji wasn't primarily
14381:
that has been tried, and it has been relatively fruitless as the editor has argued immensely when I've told them before that a source wasn't reliable. Likewise, another editor accused me of being racist against Chinese women as part of the content dispute. So, before I went and said "this source
14082:
is a pseudoscientific diagnosis which already makes this a tricky topic. In case you're unfamilliar Adrenal fatigue is the proposed concept that after periods of chronic stress the adrenal glands get tired and don't produce cortisol (super important hormone) correctly. There is many high qaulity
13541:
can afford a full-time US correspondent, never mind just to fly out a reporter for a day or two, or to hire a freelancer, or even simply to telephone the local newspaper office or local historical society. Not saying this is a reason for deprecation, just that this many basic factual errors in a
10891:
Mainstream media claims about babies in incubators in Kuwait, weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and how the war in Afghanistan was succeeding were all deliberate lies in order to support UK and U.S. government policies which haad devastating effects. They are more significant than publishing a
10816:
As mentioned above, breaches of the Code are not the same thing as rulings. And having the same number of IPSO rulings against it as The Times, which publishes a far greater number of articles, does not put it "within the norm"; it makes it about ten times worse â and considerably worse than the
10376:
The only reason that so many cases are being dragged before IPSO is presumably because they are not responding adequately to direct complaints. Being dragged before a trade tribunal, and then making amends only after you lose isn't contrition or commitment to editorial standards; it's simply the
10193:
The dust has not yet settled so we might still wait before an RfC, but this is definitely a major concern. Anything published under the current owners (April 2020) and especially under current editor (December 2021) should be treated with extreme caution. Anything by Elon Perry (pseudonym of Eli
9898:
Nor is it determined by age or whatever storiedness might be. It is determined by factual accuracy, which the JC has been proven repeatedly to lack. I would repeat, no other British newspaper has such a shocking record for slandering people and publishing false stories, not even the ones that we
8655:
Basically, the Jewish Chronicle seems to have an order of magnitude more breaches per article than The Times, bearing in mind it is a weekly with a far smaller annual output than The Times produces as a bulky daily. I'd say that is not good enough for top-drawer treatment at RSP, even before the
7723:
They appear to be a standard news organisation, although the issues highlighted raise concerns about their quality. I can't find any other issues being raised, although search for information on them is made difficult due to their name. I don't think one issue is enough to declare them generally
6762:. While I did not add the content in question to the article, I was the one who added Boaler's response, because I think it's an important part of the story. As for whether or not there is due weight for the topic to be included, I would ask: which noticeboard is appropriate for that discussion?
5996:
Though I've seen it used as a standalone source in other articles, I agree that the Stanford Daily alone should not be used to establish due weight. Inside Higher Ed, The Chronicle of Higher Education, and Ed Source are all top tier reliable sources when it comes to broadly reporting news in the
5532:
I agree, this poll is bad. I would have at least mentioned CNN Travel in the context of supporting the claim regarding "servants etc." I think I made too many mistakes on this thing. As this issue is likely to be addressed elsewhere, I would like to draw a line under this. I would like to thank
5451:
There was an RSN about Lockley after the RfC. The consensus save for one editor (who has been involved in a lot of the back and forth edits on the Yasuke page) was that his book 'African Samurai' due to its lack of citations + liberal employment of creative license, and many of his more grounded
5097:
if we're votingâbut upon reflection, I sort of wonder what possible outcomes this can even have. What's the difference between a No, a Yes, and an It Depends? The answer will be the same: "Use your judgment, look at context, look at track record of source, follow guidelines", etc. etc. I can't
4063:
The previous RfC seemed to suggest it was fine enough for a number of things. The discussion turned up a number of other scholarly RS that might be usable, such as Lopez-Vera (none of which were 100% ideal for this topic, but every topic takes what it gets). But a pop journalism writeup of a pop
13572:
While I have no particular problem with the continued deprecation of the Daily Mail, I don't feel this adds anything to the case. It's inaccurate, but we shouldn't really expect accurate geographical/historical information about minor settlements in the USA. I am willing to lay odds we can find
13322:
Are you really expecting encyclopaedia type information about a deserted town in America from a popular British newspaper? Something of very marginal interest but fills a few column inches to keep its readers occupied for a couple of minutes? How many readers in America know or care where whole
12478:
Now, there are plenty of reasons for why it is not to be considered a quality print publication -- even with print circulation and a named staff, it does not have named writers or bylines, and it has sloppy photo citations. There is an advertising policy but not an editorial policy in its print
11433:
What you just linked is an opinion piece, not a news article. Also, AJ's owners are publicly known. They have not been found to publish fabricated stories. They have not been found to hire freelance journalists using pseudonyms. They did not have their prominent columnists resign because of any
10858:
OK, so long as people reading the number of breaches are aware that multiple breaches can refer to a single article or cluster of articles. White is one of the most serious case here, and if that's 10 breaches it's 10 breaches in 4 articles, so these 4 articles are a big percentage of the total
10471:
I tried to get "in other RS" added to the policy a while ago. Also did you know according to our current policy consensus, I could cite a gravestone or a historical marker because that is technically published? I think some rigor around publication could help. Barring that, feel free to propose
8213:
In recent months, there have been suggestions in the Israeli media that stories have been placed in European newspapers, including one in the German tabloid Bild, that are based on fake or misrepresented intelligence, planted as part of an effort to support prime minister Benjaminâs Netanyahuâs
7052:
I don't think anyone has provided any reliable sources that support that perspective. No one has suggested that Fox News is a good source for establishing due weight for the topic. The only relevant content unique to that source is Boaler's rebuttal of the complaint. I think that's important to
4552:
The CNN article in question is not a breaking news article -- it is a feature. Not all articles in newspapers are news articles. There are features (profiles, retrospectives, essays and photoessays, obits), op-eds (two separate things), etc. All of these are conceptually entirely different with
4421:
That doesn't seem to be a very helpful comment unless you offer your own definition of history in this context. For the record I define it that way, history is anything which is not currently happening (call it breaking news in this context). In practical terms I guess one could argue that true
4112:
Well, you got a choice. On the one hand, you have two very imperfect but legit secondary sources on history by legit historians, which seem to be approved by the RfC. On the other, there seems to be some notion that because these are imperfect, it would be better to have these imperfect sources
3435:
The main expert interviewed in the article wrote a book on Yasuke as well as the Britannica article. The expertâs ideas are not without controversy, but the CNN article conflicts with what the expert has said about Nobunga, and in one case says the wrong source. There is so little literature on
13810:
At approximately 12:16am on July 25, 2024, officers were called to the Hunter Street East and Mark Street area about a disturbance. Upon arrival, officers learned that a man had been walking home when he passed a group of four young people. As he passed them, one spat at him and then when he
11931:
I believe that recognized subject matter experts can be counted as reliable sources, and that includes blogs that are widely used as reliable in reliable sources. It is wide ranging but not always accurate but I think acceptable for what it does. Any expert will find holes in practically every
9967:
These issues should be considered separately than the new issues. In the 2015-20 period, the instances of sloppiness and zealotry led to extreme scrutiny, the led to IPSO complaints (mostly not upheld) and to corrections. Any problematic material from this period has been corrected, and we can
9614:
issues a bit more I'd agree the baseline "green" rating should be reassessed by RfC, going back as far as Feb-Mar 2019 (from when the first major IPSO complaint/breach was dated, see citation (21)), but 2020 is close enough too. I hold from my comment that this current scandal is not extremely
7983:
This may be an isolated case â it appears to be the work of a single journalist (other papers have had scandals based on a single journalist's work, including The Guardian ...) â but the tie-in with Netanyahu and the accusation of politically motivated disinformation are potentially worrying.
7831:
There are multiple publications that have very similar names, so it's not easy to search for information on the source. Also there appears to be two very different periods in its history - from 2003â2015 it was a freesheet distributed in London, but since 2015 it has been an online news source
7154:
No-one is suggesting that Fox have, or would, falsify Boaler's quote. So the only reliability issue is the first sentence of the diff, which could just be left out as it's covered already based on other sources. Again whether that should be included isn't a matter of reliability, and should be
4027:
the original source), but they can sometimes get things wrong, or extract grossly nonrepresentative quotes from the author. Since we have Lockley's book (and plenty of other lay sources summarizing Lockley), and the CNN article cites only Lockley, I agree it would be ridiculous to cite the CNN
11321:
In fact mainstream media's reporting is often misleading and deliberately inaccurate. The problem is that it is the most accurate source we have. If we ban them, then we would not be able to cover current events. Meanwhile, singling out a small newspaper that does nothing to improve articles'
11210:
Since the JC has been active since the middle of the 19th century, I doubt if anyone could make a convincing case for it's unreliability throughout its history. It's the the period 2017-2019 which was probably the most contentious, because even the so called 'reliable' sources were lacking in
10153:
The response from JC has been swift and they've removed the offending articles. But it's left serious questions about their editorial controls, and several high profile columnist have severed their ties with the paper. The issues appear to stem from the takeover by an anonymous owner, and the
4567:
Excellent point! There's no need to confuse the issue with sophistry about whether a news article from last week is unwarrantedly caught by Zero's suggested guidelines: entirely apart from this particular case not being anywhere near the grey area, it's also a fundamentally different type of
10706:
As I explained above, the claim that there were 15 breaches upheld against the newspaper in two years was false. There were two breaches fully upheld and two partially upheld, which is within the norm. My point is that no one has demonstrated that the record of the newspaper is significantly
10423:
There has to be a better way to evaluate sources than this process. Editors are asked to base their decisions on the comments of other editors, which may or may not be accurate, have walls of text they cannot read and have no standard with which to compare criticisms with other publications.
9094:
Freedland's departure is particularly devastating. As he noted in his letter, between himself and his father, a Freedland had written for the JC for 75 years â he is only departing, with regret, due to extreme mistrust in the depths to which the editorial standards have sunk, and the risk of
8887:
Quoted in The Guardian: âIt seems that by firing Elon Perry @JewishChron is hoping to put this whole affair to bed, as if decisions werenât made at the very top to employ a fake journalist, publish nine fake articles without verifying sources, and use the paper an active agent in a pro-Bibi
3356:
per above. I think over time we have to start to include more of this UGC, but this one seems to be poorly done. Maybe deprecate for now and come back and revisit in a few years if they improve. These things either improve over time or go away entirely. Lets take a wait and see attitude, and
10543:
The problem comes in the fact its corrections and investigations are all forced. The British press regulator IPSO noted its refusal to engage in correction except when ultimately forced to do. This case shows effective fact-checking does not exist, as until the IDF complained, the paper was
9548:. âIt also once again poses the question: who owns it!? How is it that British Jews donât know who owns âtheirâ paper. Moreover, how can a paper not disclose its ownership? Itâs an oxymoron. I hate having to pose the question publicly but I asked privately more than a year ago to no avail.â
8941:
I know nothing about this source, but through reading about the Elon Perry situation I learned that no one seems to know exactly who owns the newspaper. This made me wonder whether this incomplete-information situation is a factor in assessing reliability in Knowledge. Clearly there is some
4042:
Generally speaking, the problem with citing Lockley's book is that the local consensus seemed to be that his book was not acceptable for use in the Yasuke article due to the academic review saying that the author doesn't use citations which makes it difficult to discern his speculation from
14086:
The issue that I've come to is that the high qaulity studies debunking Adrenal fatigue don't go into much detail about this sort of thing. They mention vague symptoms but not in detail. I have found a source that does go into details but the issue with this source is that it's written by a
11023:
The newspaper confirmed that Perry did serve in the IDF but said it was unable to prove claims that had appeared on his website that he was a professsor at Tel Aviv University for 15 years and that he had served as a commando soldier during Operation Entebbe in 1976. His two books are both
10359:
Not exactly. The IPSO rulings all relate to the British left and a couple to British Muslims, whereas the latest falsehoods relate to Israel/Palestine. I would not oppose us considering it generally unreliable on Israel/Palestine, although I would argue for exceptions in the case of expert
5456:
Nobunaga's death, his escape from honnoji, his service under nobutada, and even service in the Imjin War. The book does not clearly define what is fact, theory, or conjecture - but many of the theories within are present in Lockley's academic works (such as his suggestion that Yasuke was a
4737:
true, when non-academic sources start saying something else or something new, especially when there are so few academic sources on this niche topic as here. If the information you want to cite is not in the academic sources, you should really ask be asking why you're citing it in the first
3772:
In some sense, it's a continuum -- no one would object at someone saying "hold on, these news articles are all saying that Yasuke was known for his proficiency with rocket launchers; maybe we need to look at where this 'fact' is actually originating", but more complex objections can become
12361:
So the question remains whether phoronix has been factually inaccurate or sloppy, as you claim. I agree it's not a good source by any means, but for straightforward verifiable facts on niche topics we often do tolerate those SPS blogs that the greater reporting community has accepted (per
4483:
The problem with common sense is yours may not be mind, the Falklands war was 40 years ago (to me history) but you can still interview Survivors. 9/11 was 30 years ago (to me history) but you can interview survivors. History is "the study of past events, particularly in human affairs.".
14090:
My question is, can I use this as a source in the article with the context that there is no proof the disorder is real? I'm unsure of exactly how I would word this but I was thinking of something along the lines of "Symptoms that have been assocaited with adrenal fatigue include xyz".
6084:
Being reliably sourced isn't necessarily a reason for inclusion, rather all content that is included must be verifiable to a reliable source. So whether the statement is due if only Fox has covered it isn't a matter of reliability, and should be discussed on the articles talk page. --
10419:
There should be objective and persuasive arguments before sources are rated generally unreliable or deprecated/banned. It seems that a lot of these efforts are motivated by objection to the editorial policies of the publications. And if they are downgraded, it sends a message outside
2591:
is likely to be a... let's call it... frequently-edited article over the next few weeks. As of right now, its only two citations are from twitchy.com. I've seen a few mentions of it in the archives, but mostly in the context of other media properties its parent company owns. Its page
12760:
guideline page or elsewhere around the project that automatically deems a source unreliable due to a purported lack of experience in its writers. Meanwhile, there are several policy and guideline clauses that affirm Fadeaway World's reliability from the aforementioned site links (my
11054:
Perry has also faced questions about his biography, including his claims to have served as a commando soldier during Operation Entebbe and that he was a professor at Tel Aviv University for 15 years. An investigation by Channel 13âs Hatzinor news magazine found that both claims were
9436:
This is likely to require a RfC, but for the time being, TJC should be considered at least unreliable regarding Israel/Palestine and related topics due to a scandal resulting in four high-profile resignations, unclear ownership structre, plus questionable reporting as noted above.
3621:
That's pretty much 95% of what's done on RSN (or else we're resolving technical points in a larger contextual comparison of RS in context that goes on in an article's Talk page). And while we ideally try not to turn essays into P&G unnecessarily, the pandemic forced us to make
8218:
and the JC have so far declined to describe how Perry â an individual with no discernible journalistic track record, let alone as an investigative reporter â came to be writing for the paper or what due diligence had been exercised over an increasingly fantastic series of claims.
3941:
The discussion always stops on the argument on the quality of sources. At least one editor believes that sources that are listed as RS canât be questioned. All the sources that agree should be counted, and that forms the majority opinion. This comes up in every discussion topic.
9687:
2019 was the Audrey White complaint, which was a whopper that caused IPSO to alert the broader issue internally (this was linked previously in this thread, which I can't find, by someone with the relevant quote; the complaint was Feb--Mar, and ruling Nov 2019; an overview from
13054:
Now that I have looked into this, the source is not reliable. Indeed many of the sources are not reliable because they are merely parroting an old legend, but they are still good for establishing notability of the parrot. I'll work on this article hopefully if I have time. --
5306:
per context matters -- long-form or focused journalism is probably usually reliable in this vein, and can probably be particularly useful for metropolitan history, as large papers or magazines occasionally and even semi-regularly run features on historical events and persons.
3279:, this website is almost always not reliable, and contain several inconsistencies (like saying that the temperature of star X is 4,400 K, but later saying that it is between 2,400 and 3,700 K). I wouldn't be comfortable if there was any starbox using data from Universe Guide.
8104:
Mounting an "investigation" after being exposed does nothing towards establishing reliability. It was forced upon them. The conclusion "While we understand he did serve in the Israel Defense Forces, we were not satisfied with some of his claims." is about as weak as it gets.
3431:
with my attempt to replace news sources with more academic sources, like Britannica. I point out that there are major errors in the CNN Travel article, but that isnât accepted by another editor, who insists that because CNN is reliable, then the specific article is reliable.
8124:
The Jewish Chronicle maintains the highest journalistic standards in a highly contested information landscape and we deeply regret the chain of events that led to this point. We apologise to our loyal readers and have reviewed our internal processes so that this will not be
13719:
9366:
Quote: The latest scandal brings great disgrace on the paper â publishing fabricated stories and showing only the thinnest form of contrition â but it is only the latest. Too often, the JC reads like a partisan, ideological instrument, its judgments political rather than
11415:
Speaking of al Jazeera, one of its investigative journalists wrote an article accusing Western media of having"repeatedly published unsubstantiated claims, told one side of the story and glossed over violence selectively," in order to justify violations of international
9637:
in 2022. There's an issue of the lag between the date of publication and the date of reporting the outcome, but Cathcart's arithmetic is kind of hard to fathom and is at odds with the figures on the IPSO site or given in other secondary sources such as Press Gazette or
5622:
Boaler's work on the 2023 revision of the California Math Curriculum Framework was alleged to contain numerous misrepresentations and inaccuracies. In response, Boaler said that the accusations demonstrated "a lack of understanding of educational research protocols and
9644:
The letter claimed there had been 28 breaches of the Editorsâ Code in three years, and that there would be âmore victimsâ if nothing was done. In fact, IPSO says there were eight complaints upheld in the past three years, with two not upheld and two resolved through
5415:
if you want to figure this yasuke samurai stuff out, please do so without trying to make some broad distinction about whether all news stories are disallowed from historical wikipedia pages. seems like a mighty escalation to rfc with such broad and inconcise wording.
12858:
Yes, because it's a source that's being discussed for notability purposes at AfDs, and primary sources don't count towards notability. It's helpful to know whether this source can be used to shore up notability in future article creations to defend against deletion.
7129:
6602:
2999:
11816:
Mainly just got pissed when I saw wrong info on an article that was quoting an article on that website that was wronng to be honest and I also got comfirmation from a GNOME developer that the source is not reliable. I have provided two disputes confirming that too.
9422:. In my view, transparency about ownership is important for the integrity of any newspaper or media outlet. The combination of planted false stories and no insights on who finances the JC makes me doubt it could be used as a source while the ownership is not known.
3506:
for overview. (Contemporary news articles are primary sources, while features are the equivalent of pop science, even when written by an expert, as noted in the discussion you linked, as they do not cite sources for controversial claims, which is exactly what is at
12479:
edition. I'm generally flexible on shoddy subpar publications when it comes to hyperlocal news, but this is Vancouver -- there should be no shortage of better material to cite -- you should even be able to local newsblogs with explicit bylines and editorial policy.
5635:
While there are potential BLP issues with any news source, in this case we are dealing with direct quotes from the living person in question. I suppose this boils down to: Should we include Boaler's critical response to the allegations, or should it be excluded?
12449:
It doesn't have a fact-checking or editorial policy; circulates for free in random stores; calls itself "award-winning" in its logo but doesn't say what award it won anywhere on its website (and I couldn't find anything via Google); and publishes stories about
10935:
I mean anything that has the usual warning notices that it is part of AI/IP conflict. The antisemitism article does not have those notices, for instance, and that for Islamophobia only for a part of it. The usual "broadly construed" is well understood by all.
3907:
I think that the question here isn't whether this is a reliable source per se, more whether this particular claim is due for a particular article. If it is an exceptional claim, it may be published in an otherwise reputable source and still not be due for the
13298:
I don't really see why we would even bother giving these random opinion pieces the time of day to be honest. If they don't consider fabricating their own front pages (among other things) a dealbreaker that really says more about them than it does about us.
14179:
I would suggest editing the article using Super Goku V suggestion and see if anyone objects. The issue with pre-approving sources is that anyone objecting won't know to object until you edit, making any pre-approval pointless. This is why the process for
13644:, which makes it sound like the enthusiasts may have a means of requesting that OS data be updated. In my view, we should let the OS do the job of evaluating the claims of the enthusiasts. Once OS see fit to update their data, we can update our articles.
8364:
BTW the JC is a weekly tabloid format that is less than half the length of the times. In the time one edition of the JC comes out, the Times has published at least 12 times the number of words. The fact it is producing as many rulings as the Times is
4113:
filtered through the lens of the non-historian, non-rigorous, more-pop-audience-focused, news magazines like a CNN feature (which goes so far as to additionally cite even worse sources for information, like a TV show). How does this at all make sense?
9281:
5771:
I haven't done a comprehensive search recently, but when the content was added the Fox News source was the only mainstream source that reported on her rebuttal of the allegations. I'll see if I can find anything else that's been reported since then.
3535:
Britannica: "The researcher Thomas Lockley (the author of this article) speculates that they may have seen him as a form of divine visitor due to the fact that the Buddha and other holy figures were often portrayed as black-skinned in Japan at this
9459:
Contrast to some of our unreliable outlets where an article or reporter or topic caught red-handed on serial inaccuracy/exaggeration/slop is simply tolerated and dismissed as just a normal part of their political bias or low expectations of rigor.
3595:, which is a policy), or where it contradicts itself, or where it flat out tells an obvious falsehood (such as the sky is not blue). What we do not do is use our own knowledge rather than referring to RS that contest a claim) to dismiss a source.
10391:
Again, read the rulings; in almost all cases the correction had already been made before IPSO ruled. The most serious cases (e.g. the one relating to Rabbi Weiss) relate to a failure to make a correction, but there are only one or two such cases.
4022:
Lockley's book is the one with any semblance of academic review (by the publisher and in academic publications after the fact), while the CNN article has none. I love citing a pop sci journalist who writes a good lay summary of an academic source
11451:. Note I just found this via a web search so I don't know how valid it is. I do know that AJ has a reputation for bias in this area and there have been accusations that some of their reporters are actively involved with the anti Israel groups.
5533:
everyone for their input as well as patience. If I should have notified someone of this, then I am sorry, I didnât notify anyone. I am not sure if I should officially close this or not, but I probably wonÂŽt be returning to this page for a while.
4240:
stipend, house and servants. Ćta GyĆ«ich wasnât a Jesuit. There are other sources that mention a stipend, but they are also Japanese. A Jesuit source mentions Yasuke receiving money, but I donât think any expert has suggested that was a stipend.
9747:
As for the paper's owners, it is normal for newspaper owners to have views. The owners of the New York Times and their place on the political spectrum are known. What people are saying with respect to The Jewish Chronicle is that the owners are
4043:
researched factual statements. The previous attempt to discuss Lockley's book here for a wider consensus was extremely drawn out, bogged down, and is confusing as to what it represents, so much so that I cannot derive any real meaning from it.
7372:
Biased but reliable. Their investigations are solid and used by others. They report on topics not covered by more mainstream sources. If other more reliable sources exist for a claim, those might take precedence; if not, this source is fine.
6934:
3510:
The linked discussion links to a review of Lockley's book (from which the CNN article seems to mostly be excerpted), in which it is made clear that the lack of citations are in the book as well, and it is intended as a pop history for casual
9418:. There are too many serious problems. Most recently, and discussed here, is a whole range of fabricated stories. That is already concerning, so much so that many high-profile contributors have resigned. Perhaps even more concerning is that
4465:
test would be if it is something that journalists or historians are considered experts on. Another might be that if there is the possibility to interview witnesses, then it is news. In this case, 1500s Japan is clearly history and not news.
10999:
reposted Freedland's resignation, saying that he had watched "with dismay the collapse in integrity and standards of the Jewish Chronicle." "Itâs been a disaster for the Jewish community," he added, applauding Freedland for his decision to
10254:. There was no inaccuracy in the article, just a lack of context for a quote from a third party about the complainant. Nonetheless, the paper offered an apology and correction, which duly appears. This is totally normal newspaper practice.
4725:-- other than the fact that, as has been pointed out, they have been factually been misleading on key points for which they are cited (and for which they themselves give no attribution -- glancing at the discussion you link, date range).
10665:'s false stories about WMDs in Iraq, and unsubstantiated stories about babies being beheaded by Hamas. For twenty years mainstream media told us we were winning in Afghanistan until one day the U.S. soldiers left and its govenment fled.
7297:
They're certainly biased to the left, but they're one of the few organizations that has on-the-ground coverage of social movements/protests in the United States and engages in investigative reporting of the far right. They have both an
11831:
Can you provide the specific article (the WP article and the citation in question)? Phoronix newsblog posts are not generally a RS per existing guidelines, but I don't think anyone has posted an example of it being factually incorrect
11280:
I only abbreviated as I had already mentioned the full descriptions in my comment already, these shouldn't be taken as final wording. The dates are also should be considered set, especially the 2019 date could be set earlier early. --
3059:
8349:
that 15 people "have won IPSO complaints or libel settlements against the Jewish Chronicle since 2018", in reality that related to people who sent a letter in 2021, so it covers 3 years not 5. The JC has along track record of extreme
11632:
I initially pushed back on this for that reason, but there are many secondary sources now covering the issues and those articles aren't just limited to this one event but a express concerns with a declining standard at the paper. --
11587:
5483:. With such a broad question, without real actionable options, I suspect most reasonable editors would hedge and say "it depends"... which is basically a more polite way of saying they can't/won't comment without much more context.
2983:
3105:
11343:(especailly in terms of its reputation among the highest-quality sources.) RS doesn't mean that everything a source says is perfect, or free of bias, or anything like that; it just means that they have a good reputation overall.
4392:
That seems overly restrictive... Unless you start with a very restrictive definition of history (something other than history being the past). A newspaper writing about something that happened last week is writing about history.
4183:
It seems to have happened in stages. The CNN article was used to support the claim about Yasuke being given a stipend, a house, and servants. I replaced it with a citation of the Britannica article that had been newly rewritten.
2979:
6657:
4307:, amigo (although he's not always the easiest to understand, to be fairâ). I read him as saying that the primary sources for this particular claim are to be found in Japanese accounts; the Jesuit primary sources exist, but for
12326:
is also a policy exemption. Phoronix has caused very little problems as a source. It generally reports the truth. The source is regarded as reliable by other sources. In fact, those sources base entire articles on what Larabel
8868:
If I understand the nature of the complaint, the paper had a reporter filing false stories. The paper has publicly retracted the stories and fired the reporter. Isn't that what we want out of a RS? If not then shouldn't the
8030:
It's become clear as the story has evolved that the "journalist" involved has issues with his credentials and seemingly little background in journalism at all. It's a fairly similar case to the NYT editorial standards scandal.
4870:
If you wish to discuss whether content is, or is not, due for inclusion in an article that discuss should be had at the articles talk page or another appropriate forum. Inclusion is not a matter of verification but of NPOV. --
12156:
It is just a blog, we shouldn't consider it reliable. But that doesn't mean it is unreliable. I suppose it depends the claim and article it is used on. I know nothing about SW, so take my comments with a grain of salt please.
14354:
content and the difference between academic dates by the same scholar is that important (which is my impression given the information you gave me) then maybe you should take an honest discussion of scholarly sources back to
7972:
Why did a British Jewish newspaper publish fake Israeli intelligence? Israelâs army suspects fabrications published in the Jewish Chronicle were part of a pro-Bibi influence campaign, while the articleâs author is not as he
12482:
Of course, in this case, OP is not using this for hyperlocal news, but provincial news plus an MP, so there's really no reason to use a subpar hyperlocal source on here period when you should find ample coverage elsewhere.
10776:) and one that relates to someone that might be reasonably called on the British left. The overwhelming majority relate to the UK Jewish community, so we'd gut our coverage of that if we lost the JC as a source altogether.
6849:
invented by you. The actual reasons given by me and several others are that Boaler has been the target of politically motivated attacks, with the California mathematics framework being used by the right wing as a proxy for
12712:
Like at SB Nation and similar blog networks, the Maven site operators are independent contractors. They start with low base pay and no benefits, though company officials say they can make more if they drive traffic and ad
9630:
9263:
It is unsafe to compare archived copies for this. The style used in the English Haaretz is a sentence at the end, which might not have made the archive. I don't have a subscription to the Hebrew Haaretz, so I can't check.
8789:
resignations and ownership issue rather than these breaches) and 2/ are the pre-2020 breaches serious enough for us to downgrade reliability for a longer period, and if so from when? (my take: probably not serious enough).
6944:
10121:
So not only his credentials were fake, but also his name ... while his subsequent actions speak for themselves. The Times of Israel has also ripped down blogs by the same author, presumably fearful of possible contagion.
4905:
I'm not saying that there aren't questions about reliability here, just that that's the only discussion that should be had here. Splitting discussions about what content to include to an unrelated board isn't helpful. --
4670:
Some crucial information is missing from this thread, which I stumbled upon by chance. Tinynanorobots has been repeatedly removing news sources from the Yasuke article (in what seems like a slow edit war) since August 22
3970:
There are better sources, but the other editor keeps replacing the better sources with news sources because of weight. When I point out that the news sources arenât as good, I am called a ] and accused of violating NPOV.
10495:
One problem with tables of breaches is that it actually stacks our process against publications, such as the Jewish Chronicle, that are regulated (where there's an authority which records complaints, in this case IPSO).
8985:
told me he now regretted ever being involved because of its âincredibly opaqueâ nature. He said he and another consortium member had asked directly who the other backers were and found it was âan absolutely closed doorâ.
8553:
It's not a red herring. It points to a recent habit of editorial sloppiness and abuse, which, alongside the now lack of transparency regarding the ownership of the publication, forms a pattern of concerning information.
8256:
It should already be listed with yellow, given the summary of before 2010 and the prior no consensus, so at the least, edit the listing to conform to additional considerations (and put the ongoing discussion tag up). --
6746:
There has also been another contingent of editors who have been responding quite emphatically that Fox News is just not a source to be used in anything that has even the patina of politics, with just the use of the word
4192:
There have been a lot of edits in the lead, and the citations moved around, often as part of other edits. The claim about the stipend etc. later received a citation to an academic source, but then was replaced with CNN.
4028:
article if it misrepresents the source at all. Citing a lay summary (in parallel) is only worthwhile if it's (1) free and (2) good. (For my previous post I probably meant to erase that final sentence that was cut off.)
2987:
2631:
With that said, it makes me wonder why the page has been approved at all with only two citations and from a potentially iffy source at that. It doesn't sound like it's evidenced a great deal of notability at this time.
8011:
Journalists sometimes don't have to reveal sensitive sources to their editors, so it's possible this reporter got played. Announcing an investigation into what went wrong is precisely what we would expect an RS to do.
7608:, opinions seemed to believe there was reason to doubt the reliability of The South African so this is why I am formally opening the RFC and asking the community given it has similar characteristics to the issues from
6980:
It may be the case that the only reason this is in the news now is due to the right wing media. That is regrettable, as the issues with the scholarship in the CMF were widely discussed back in 2022. See Brian Conrad's
8134:
I agree this is not good enough. "Has served in the IDF" â with no further details, such as rank, years of service etc. â is risible. (Military service is compulsory in Israel for everyone unless exempt for religious
5497:
The correct answer is 'it depends', but realistically no valid answer can be given to the question beyond pointing towards some policy pages. The answer to such a broad question would be best laid out in an essay. --
13323:
countries like Austria are? It is not where somebody writing about the town would expect to get reliable information from any more than they'd expect to get something reliable about Tyneham in the Los Angeles Times.
12204:
policy is that "expertise" must be evaluated by reliable sources, not by individual editors, and I believe when reliable sources base their reporting on a Phoronix post, that means Larabel is considered an expert by
3784:(Interesting, perhaps, to note that one argument made in the RfC in question has been that we must assume news organizations such as CNN Travel have teams of fact-checkers & on-hand experts ensuring accuracy. As
12832:
In general, the original primary source is most suitable for straightforward descriptive statements of fact. Is there any reason why you're looking for secondary sources if stats are the only thing being supported?
12532:
Yes we definitely need a RFC, but what happened to the last RFC, and how did it get a reliable rating? I vaguely recall an inconsistency between the balance of views and final decision, yet I can no longer find it.
13811:
confronted them another knocked his turban off his head and stepped on it. Another male tried to intervene and both men were struck in the head with pop cans. The initial victim was treated at the scene by EMS.
5709:
The topic here is whether we should include her rebuttal of the allegations. The coverage of the anonymous allegations is a separate topic which may be worth digging into, but that's not based on Fox News sources.
10836:
IPSO has also itself been specifically accused of dragging its feet and being exposed as the rather conflicted regulator it is in relation to the JC, first in 2021 when it reacted on a two-year delay to issues in
10887:
I cannot accept a tip of the iceberg claim without evidence. My concern is that if we set the bar low for deprecation, then no publication meets it and whether or not an outlet is deprecated becomes a popularity
9743:
journalistic â in other words, the politicisation comes at the expense of journalistic standards. This criticism is not restricted to the now-removed set of articles, and it is something that we should take note
8663:
The âfabricationsâ and resignations that plunged The Jewish Chronicle into crisis: The newspaper has lost credibility â and writers including David Baddiel â after a contributor was accused of making up Gaza war
4977:
11544:
The British writers who resigned have made clear that there have been problems with politicisation trumping journalistic standards for years; what happened now was merely the straw that broke the camel's back â
11017:
Several prominent columnists have resigned from the worldâs oldest Jewish newspaper amid allegations that the paper ran fabricated news stories that advanced the Israeli governmentâs narratives about the war in
10873:
The complaint was for accuracy, privacy and harassment of which only the first was upheld. However, the findings showed that a number of false claims had been made about the complainant. But that was five years
12664:
Is Fadeaway World a reliable source for basketball content (particularly NBA stats)? Myself and one other user seem to be butting heads about this matter at a couple of ongoing AfDs. I maintain that the site's
7240:
I'd be cautious. Their "About Us" makes no mention of editors, fact-checking, or even who their writers are. It's a nonprofit set up to report "underrepresented stories" and present "alternative perspectives";
8425:
The last two years were from Sept. 2022 to Sept. 2024, during which there were four complaints with four (not 16) breaches upheld. There were also nine complaints over the previous eight years the IPSO was in
13814:
Itâs also believed the group of young people is connected to the theft of soft drinks reported at a nearby convenience store (Hunter Street East and Burnham Street) about 11:50pm on Wednesday, July 24, 2024.
5786:"Boaler denied the allegations" requires a source, like everything. You can't cutely dance around citing sources that you're taking information from just because you think the source is icky. That's textbook
7011:
Boaler has received extensive criticism from across the political spectrum, with the most substantive criticism having nothing to do with culture war issues. In fact, if you review high quality sources like
6899:
It's not misleading and it's not an oversimplification. OP asked about a particular aspect of the criticism (i.e. an anonymous complaint discussed in a Fox News story) and that's what we've been discussing.
2991:
11156:
The main contention seems to be between the broader "Unreliable since 2019 for Antisemitism, Islamophobia, Israel and Palestine" and the narrower "Unreliable since 2021 for Israel and Palestine". So maybe:
3515:
his speculation in a non-rigorous work, and so must at best be given with attribution. (The more history-topic-inclined editors may decide some statements should be discarded entirely as non-encyclopedic.)
13941:
Surely this is more than enough to be used a source per a paragraph stating the details of events that took place specifically as police have stated themselves they have "classified this as a hate crime"
11604:
Plethora of complaints from Jewish/Israeli journalists, published across a wide spectrum of mainstream publications, about loss of integritry and collapse of editorial standards at the Jewish Chronicle â
10771:
Scanning through the first couple of hundred of these, excluding talk page links, there are maybe two that fall directly under Israel/Palestine (one relating to food in Jerusalem, and one a commentary by
9314:
I regularly find stealth edits of article bodies (not headlines), in top outlets like The Guardian or the NYT, with no disclosure. Not a valid signal of unreliability, regardless of how we feel about it.
5748:). If Fox is the only outlet that has published the denial, we should still include it. That doesn't mean we should use the Fox source to expand the mention of allegations. A better version would just be
10843:
It's also worth remembering that only the worst and often most defamatory material tends to end up in an IPSO complaint, so such rulings/breaches are merely the tip of the iceberg of editorial failings.
8053:
I merely want the RSP entry clarified that JC is unreliable (rather than no consensus) for topics related to the British Left, Muslims, Islam, and Palestine/Palestinians and that seems clearly to be the
3055:
11512:
Altogether, we definitely have enough here to go with an RFC, it's not based on one event , it's a pattern over time since 2021. The only RFC for this publication was an initially sock infested affair,
10544:
publishing random crap without asking itself any questions. So, we ask how much else has been getting through that hasn't been noticed? We can't know. In effect, we do and have deprecated for much less.
12008:
A web search shows that Larabel only publishes articles on Phoronix, which makes Phoronix generally unreliable as a self-published blog that does not qualify for the subject-matter expert exception. â
11565:âHeâs a very pleasant man to talk to, very nice⊠it took me a little bit of time to realise that Jake, I think, is really very, very much more right wing than anybody else Iâve ever worked for really.â
13022:, a mass-media holding company, owns over 200 local media plus USA Today and other things. Overall I see no general reason it would not be reliable, but have not read the article itself to judge. --
7428:
If something isn't notable (a 4 person rally), we'll not cover it, so this is irrelevant. UR is in no way comparable to Breitbart; Breitbart is (super)biased plus unreliable while UR is just biased.
5347:
Not an RfC, "news sources" and "history" are not well defined as this was immediately pointed out as problematic in the preceding paragraphs, and probably not here as we discuss academic sourcing in
12390:
can be considered as a reliable source under Knowledge rules. Thank you ! - Also just to note they also have a weekly physical print that goes out to the local south asian community in Vancouver,
9953:
See my answer above. TFD's comments are a good faith error on the number of breaches, and a failure to consider libel rulings and the difference in number of issues between weekly and daily titles.
7925:), accusing the paper of publishing outright disinformation in service of a PR campaign by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Interestingly, some of the pushback is from the Israeli Defense Forces:
3700:". . . the specific nature of the source in both the context of the nature of the article and the specific content for which a source is intended to be used is important in determining reliability.
5860:
Is anyone but Fox and/or other unreliable culture war conservative publications reporting on these anonymous allegations? If not, neither the allegations nor the denial should be in the article.
14305:
on p.77. My instinct in this case is that the source is unreliable for these purposes and we should favor the academic books, but I wanted to seek outside opinion from more experienced editors.
6167:
To be clear the reason they are reporting on this at all is because of culture war issues, however they phrase their article or what category of article it's sorted into doesn't change that. --
7761:(invited by the bot) Except in extreme cases, I'm against generalization (=overgeneralization) of any source. Which means "other considerations apply" is what nearly all should be. Sincerely,
6758:
It's probably worth shifting focus to evaluate whether or not this topic should be included in the article, and the address the issue of whether or not Boaler's response should be included per
6413:
and 'grievance departments,' Rufo said. Observers such as Isaac Kamola, director of the Center for the Defense of Academic Freedom at the American Association of University Professors, see 'a
4218:
It seems to me that all of these edits did more then just remove the source, they also removed claims solely sourced to that source. Also "that it attributes the stipend, house and servants to
11731:
Waiting of an internal investigation into this latest issue isn't going to change anything. It will however allow editors to continue using the JC as a credible source for an indefinite time.
10100:
9779:
9234:, who has written for the JC for over fifty years), but there is no note marking the updates, nor a new publication time/date. You can find stealth updates even in a newspaper of record like
8516:
A thing to bear in mind when comparing publications is publication frequency and volume. The Times is a fat daily, the JC is a weekly, publishing a rather smaller number of stories per year.
12330:
Does a literal reading of the policy benefit the encyclopedia here? Treating Phoronix as a marginally reliable source would address the issues brought up the original poster of this thread.
10518:
I am not an expert at all in this subject, but I would note that the presence of a statement by the source stating that an investigation is ongoing plus resignations of staff evidences that
8942:
dependency on knowledge of ownership (e.g. state owned, run by the CCP etc.) that might have an impact on a case-by-case basis, but I'm curious how not knowing who owns a source is handled.
10614:
I have said before I'm not wild about deprecation without going through gunrel first. One would need quite a bit of "fabrication" evidence for deprecation (and it would have to be an RFC).
3395:
Amateur blog? Not reliable. Simple as that. If it were a blog by an expert in the field, maybe. But since its not, then I don't see the need for it to continue to be used as a source here.
14295:
syllabus as a reliable source. The user trying to use the source in question has attempted to use it in the first sentence of the lead, displacing the author's academically published book
13908:
13847:
10353:
OK, "trivial" perhaps too strong a word, but I urge people here to read the rulings and see if these inaccuracies would be cause for a general unreliability ruling for another publication.
5131:
Reliable news media are reliable sources for news. They hire professional journalists whose work is then reviewed by editors. However, they are not specialists in any academic discipline.
10260:, a partially upheld complaint where the upheld part was was promptly remedied by the paper. Slightly more serious than Davies, but nowhere near grounds for designation of unreliability.
7306:. I would presume they publish under the Unicorn Riot byline rather than individual names because they operate as a collective. So yes, be cautious and attribute their reporting in-text.
7034:
Sure, but you raised the issue of this particular anonymous complaint, and several of us has argued that it is a right wing culture wars canard. Both things can be true at the same time.
6081:
statement, but that would apply only the second sentence. The first sentence is additional commentary separate from the ABOUTSELF statement, so Fox is likely not a suitable source for it.
13102:
the DYK nom? Or are we saying that this is the article's best source? I don't see the point of expending community time litigating something if it can be resolved through simpler means.
6465:
there was an attack on Boaler because she promotes racial equity in STEM. I pointed out that your own source in fact suggests this. You don't get to dictate how sources are used here. â
4741:
Anyway, all this substantive discussion of the content of sources as relates to the article is not appropriate to RSN, but rather the article's Talk page. Here we have said to abide by
8293:
establish weight and some opinion on the degree of credibility. In this case, the story was picked up, so could have been used, even if we did not use the Jewish Chronicle as a source.
5024:
calls out that mainstream news sources are fine from a categorical perspective (in short, policy does not support the blanket exclusion of all news sources from all history articles).
4120:
original secondary source behind all this, because they think it's not an RS, then refer them to this thread and the RfC. If they raise an undue fuss, we can chew them out from there.
11590:
publishing an opinion that "The venerable British Jewish paper has increasingly abandoned journalistic integrity in order to champion causes widely associated with the Israeli right".
10263:
Unless the other examples are considerably more significant, this list adds nothing. Focusing on this trivia is a distraction from the serious issues that have emerged more recently.
12263:, which include Phoronix, are generally considered questionable. If Larabel starts publishing articles in reliable sources independent of Phoronix, he would begin to qualify for the
8276:(2019, 2021) to press regulator IPSO's standards department due to unacceptable conduct. No other paper has been referred to the standards department, not even the ones we deprecate.
4950:
argument - you can't exclude a source simply because you disagree with it, which is what claiming "this source is full of errors" amounts to. Reliability is about a source's overall
11671:
10101:
publication of a fabricated story by a freelance journalist under a pseudonym who after their firing made death threats to an Israeli reporter due to the revealing of their identity
3452:
9770:
4298:
Also 'that it attributes the stipend, house and servants to Jesuit sources', yes as that is where all those other sources get the claim, they are talking about the primary sources.
7497:
2572:
7596:
The reason why I am opening this RFC is that I have a concern about The South African hosting plagiarised Knowledge content in their news articles. The one that concerned me was
6295:
It would need a source if I were trying to add that claim to the article. I'm just using my common sense and knowledge of how conservative politics operate in the United States.
5751:
In March 2024, an anonymous complaint was sent to Stanford's dean of research alleging Boaler had violated the research policies of the university. Boaler denied the allegations.
4553:
regards to whatever the above is. (Unless of course the samurai have reanimated and asserted a new dominion in the past week -- I don't watch CNN, so I suppose I wouldn't know).
14137:
14058:
10302:
It is worth noting that this "trivia" had already resulted in this board deciding that there is no consensus on JC's reliability on precisely the topic of its latest falsehoods.
6511:
There is no mention of DEI in the article. There is also no mention of any scientific publication, as there are none being referenced. Maybe you are reading the wrong article?
3174:
Nothing about the source makes it reliable for verification purposes, and if it is still being regularly added to articles for that purpose then deprecation is appropriate. --
12994:
8168:
10687:
source â very high-profile fabrications, unknown ownership, high number of adverse IPSO rulings relative to its publication volume â ought to be reflected in its RSP entry.
9801:
Andrevan's comment makes a false comparison with the NYT. The New York Times has almost 6,000 employees and a print circulation of 300,000, and 9 million online subscribers.
2835:
6943:, a conservative blog. Whatever the reasons for the initial complaint, it's only in the news now because of the right-wing culture war on DEI. At least one observer sees a
6660:
5203:. Each source must be carefully weighed to judge whether it is reliable for the statement being made in the Knowledge article and is an appropriate source for that content.
12682:
9878:
It announced in March that it would be owned by a charitable trust. I would like to point out that a lot of horrible people have owned news media in the UK over the years.
7955:
4236:
The diffs that I linked to? I donât see that. There are a lot of changes to the lead, but I canât keep track of that, especially as a lot of them arenât discussed on talk.
14068:
13231:
The river changed course after the Civil War "because of the huge reconstruction" of damaged buildings and the construction of a bridge "crossing the Mississippi River".
13658:
If it's acknowledged as more reliable by other reliable sources, the it shouldn't be difficult to show that. But unless that can be shown the OS should be preferred. --
11010:
10208:
As I stated previously, the record of the JC was extremely poor prior to April 2020. In the two years previous to this the IPSO upheld and sanctioned the following cases
11765:
11514:
10921:
antisemitism. The other topics make more sense, especially if exceptions are made for expert contributors, and making this ruling for post-2020 also makes more sense.)
10439:
8048:
4141:
Also, how do I know that there is a consensus on this thread? It seems like every either broadly agrees with me, or is asking questions and not giving clear responses.
7929:
7917:
This is a still developing story worth keeping an eye on: Over the past few days, several heavyweight sources in Israel and elsewhere have impugned the reliability of
6374:
8329:
Note that only four of the alleged breaches were upheld and they took place over a period of three years. The Times had 16 complaints upheld during the same period.
7559:
13964:
you should use secondary sources rather than the police report. Also unless the names of the individuals involved have been widely reported they should be left out (
12716:
12451:
9639:
6396:
5927:
4050:. I have seen people post in the talk discussion that the RSN consensus was it was unreliable, I have seen other editors argue the opposite. It is a confusing mess.
3304:
You asked whether it should be deprecated or blacklisted, but only listed deprecated as one of the options for voting. Blacklisting is not bundled in deprecation. â
9968:
therefore be pretty confident of reliability. There is a case for attribution of contentious claims in that period; there is no case for designation as unreliable.
7873:
5059:
of a source and trying to arbitrarily discard it, it is how many people at that source are involved in the overall editorial, proofreading, and publishing process.
3986:
3475:
14296:
11246:
Also, we should spell out the meaning of "AI/IP" â most people associate these acronyms primarily with the "Artificial Intelligence/Intellectual Property" debate.
10790:
I think that is probably the case for many sources, a sledgehammer/non-surgical approach may have unintended consequences and cause unnecessary collateral damage.
8451:, founder of Hacked Off, former advisor to the government on press standards and Professor of journalism at Kingston university, who gives the following timeline:
4991:
3445:
228:
14427:
Of course, I imagine WP:EXPERTSPS is particularly useful to some editors in some instances; suffice to say the example raised above does not seem to be one where
10413:
a higher rate because it is a weekly. While no one claims that the Jewish Chronicle is in the same league as the Times, that doesn't mean it should be deprecated.
8070:
Probably best to wait and see how they handle the situation. This is obviously bad, but what comes of their internal investigation will be a better indicator. --
5156:
good for determining the long term significance of the events they are reporting on. In short, there is more to the issue than a yes/no question of reliability.
13607:
peer reviewed or accepted by any reputable body. My view is that this source is intriniscally unreliable and is not an acceptable source for Knowledge articles.
11988:. While I have a favorable impression of Phoronix's content quality and consider Larabel a Linux expert, he does not meet the subject-matter expert criterion in
10710:
We need an objective rather than anecdotal approach to banning sources. I could put together a case as strong as the one presented here against any publication.
10096:
9661:
I think we have to distinguish between IPSO cases or rulings and breaches of the Editor's Code. Each ruling can identify multiple breaches of the code, see e.g.
8972:
4664:
4650:
3609:
There is no policy that all RS on their face are equal, or that we cannot use multiple factors to judge the suitability RS in context. Per the intro overview of
13743:
12428:
11760:
9134:
8444:
8273:
7352:
Some news reporting is primary, some is not. We can't say the whole outlet is primary just because part of their work is invesitgative/on-the-ground reporting.
3917:
13198:
13174:
10251:
3063:
416:
9139:"The Chronicle has not explained how Perry came to author stories that it published nor offered details about how it plans to change its editorial practices."
10577:
Idk, the part I am most bothered by is AI/IP and I think that should be gunrel, if we can agree that in this discussion then maybe we can do without an RFC?
8174:
7597:
4386:
3421:
487:
11549:
said he had watched "with dismay the collapse in integrity and standards of the Jewish Chronicle" which had been "a disaster for the Jewish community" (see
11031:
Four columnists quit Jewish Chronicle over standards, secrecy and âbiasâ: Writers condemn lapse in standards, secrecy and drift to right of specialist title
10107:. The Jewish Chronicle should be immediately deprecated generally and on matters related to antisemitism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict specifically.
7904:
6370:
6196:
4935:
2995:
14372:
Oh, my apologies. I didn't know I should provide a diff to the article when I was asking about whether a source would be reliable or not. In particular in
14303:
musical performance and sexual performance were, in fact, usually the forte of an individual known as a "singing girl" (geji æćŠ, literally "song courtesan)
14218:
Sounds good. I wasn't looking for pre-approval persay I was moreso looking to see if there was any major issues with the approach I am planning on taking.
13730:
12296:
7299:
14269:
14227:
14213:
13909:
https://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/news/crime/police-investigating-alleged-hate-crime-in-east-city/article_a16db3cf-13cc-5862-b347-5a1327c388c3.html
13848:
https://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/news/crime/police-investigating-alleged-hate-crime-in-east-city/article_a16db3cf-13cc-5862-b347-5a1327c388c3.html
12818:
Do you have evidence of other reliable sources directly proving that Fadeaway World has made uncorrected false or inaccurate statements about NBA stats?
11580:
11509:
10357:
this "trivia" had already resulted in this board deciding that there is no consensus on JC's reliability on precisely the topic of its latest falsehoods.
9528:
9348:
9223:
7668:, specifically the lede. I don't know if that may change people's opinion as to whether its just one author or the whole source needs a look at. Pinging
6563:
6554:
5947:
4046:
Honestly, I wonder if holding an RfC about whether or not Lockley's book is a reliable source might be in order if for no reason than to hopefully get a
374:
173:
14510:
13924:
13779:
11892:
10841:
8595:
Yes, the output of the Times is far greater than the output of the JC, so with half the breaches JC has proportionately more in relation to its content.
6037:
The fact that Stanford isn't investigating this at all seems to reinforce that it would be undue to include these anonymous allegations in the article.
4774:
If the RfC on the author was at the article Talk page, then an RfC on the author's book about the article subject belongs on the article Talk page too.
13638:
12534:
11959:
think we need more than one example of a problem before we can downgrade the source, and it needs to be documented in writing in some amount of rigor.
11732:
11702:
11216:
11099:
10560:
The resignations aren't positive actions by the publication; they are actions by former staff in despair at the publication's lack of positive action.
10458:
10321:
10233:
9597:
9489:
8180:
2939:
2425:
2421:
2417:
2413:
2409:
2405:
2401:
2397:
2393:
2389:
2385:
2381:
2377:
2373:
2369:
2365:
2361:
2357:
2353:
2349:
2345:
2341:
2337:
2333:
2329:
2325:
2321:
2317:
2313:
2309:
2305:
2301:
2297:
2293:
2289:
2285:
2281:
2277:
2273:
2269:
2265:
2261:
2257:
2253:
2249:
2245:
2241:
2237:
2233:
2229:
2225:
2221:
2217:
2213:
2209:
2205:
2201:
2197:
2193:
2189:
2185:
2181:
2177:
2173:
2169:
2165:
2161:
2157:
2153:
2149:
2145:
2141:
2137:
2133:
2129:
2125:
2121:
2117:
2113:
2109:
2105:
2101:
2097:
2093:
2089:
2085:
2081:
2077:
2073:
2069:
2065:
2061:
2057:
2053:
2049:
2045:
2041:
2037:
2033:
2029:
2025:
2021:
2017:
2013:
2009:
2005:
2001:
1997:
1993:
1989:
1985:
1981:
1977:
1973:
1969:
1965:
1961:
1957:
1953:
1949:
1945:
1941:
1937:
1933:
1929:
1925:
1921:
1917:
1913:
1909:
1905:
1901:
1897:
1893:
1889:
1885:
1881:
1877:
1873:
1869:
1865:
1861:
1857:
1853:
1849:
1845:
1841:
1837:
1833:
1829:
1825:
1821:
1817:
1813:
1809:
1805:
1801:
1797:
1793:
1789:
1785:
1781:
1777:
1773:
1769:
1765:
1761:
1757:
1753:
1749:
1745:
1741:
1737:
1733:
1729:
1725:
1721:
1717:
1713:
1709:
1705:
1701:
1697:
1693:
1689:
1685:
1681:
1677:
1673:
1669:
1665:
1661:
1657:
1653:
1649:
1645:
1641:
1637:
1633:
1629:
1625:
1621:
1617:
1613:
1609:
1605:
1601:
1597:
1593:
1589:
1585:
1581:
1577:
1573:
1569:
1565:
1561:
1557:
1553:
1549:
1545:
1541:
1537:
1533:
1529:
1525:
1521:
1517:
1513:
1509:
1505:
1501:
1497:
1493:
1489:
1485:
1481:
1477:
1473:
1469:
1465:
1461:
1457:
1453:
1449:
1445:
1441:
1437:
1433:
1429:
1425:
1421:
1417:
1413:
1409:
1405:
1401:
1397:
1393:
1389:
1385:
1381:
1377:
1373:
1369:
1365:
1361:
1357:
1353:
1349:
1345:
1341:
1337:
1333:
1329:
1325:
1321:
1317:
1313:
1309:
1305:
1301:
1297:
1293:
1289:
1285:
1281:
1277:
1273:
1269:
1265:
1261:
1257:
1253:
1249:
1245:
1241:
1237:
1233:
1229:
1225:
1221:
1217:
1213:
1209:
1205:
1201:
1197:
1193:
1189:
1185:
1181:
1177:
1173:
1169:
1165:
1161:
1157:
1153:
1149:
1145:
1141:
1137:
1133:
1129:
1125:
1121:
1117:
1113:
1109:
1105:
1101:
1097:
1093:
1089:
1085:
1081:
1077:
1073:
1069:
1065:
1061:
1057:
1053:
1049:
1045:
1041:
1037:
1033:
1029:
1025:
1021:
13841:
13220:
Economically dependent on river traffic, Rodney, Mississippi, gradually declined when the Mississippi River shifted several miles away from the town.
12882:
The following examples cover only some of the possible types of reliable sources and source reliability issues, and are not intended to be exhaustive.
12281:
11334:
11310:
11275:
8834:
Do you think we should have a policy whereby if a publications exceeds a set number of breaches it should be deprecated? What would the threshold be?
7867:
5944:
3493:
7184:
7096:
6831:
6817:
6210:
6162:
6128:
6114:
1017:
1013:
1009:
1005:
1001:
997:
993:
989:
985:
981:
977:
973:
969:
965:
961:
957:
953:
949:
945:
941:
937:
933:
929:
925:
921:
917:
913:
909:
905:
901:
897:
893:
889:
885:
881:
877:
873:
869:
865:
861:
857:
853:
849:
845:
841:
837:
833:
829:
825:
821:
817:
813:
809:
805:
801:
797:
793:
789:
785:
781:
777:
773:
769:
765:
761:
757:
753:
749:
745:
741:
737:
733:
729:
725:
721:
717:
713:
709:
705:
701:
697:
693:
689:
685:
681:
677:
673:
669:
665:
661:
12899:
This is less use by others, and more commentary by others. Reliable third parties saying the source is unreliable points to the source not having a
9052:
8192:
6780:
Whether something should be included is an NPOV issue. It's usually best discussed on the article talk page, but outside opinion could be sought at
5083:; impenetrably dense discussion seems to have kilt the motivating RfCâand I've been known to get wordy, myself... âthanks for taking the initiative,
12685:
is the main argument presented by the other user that questions the site. I'd appreciate wider community input to develop consensus on the matter.
6133:
This is obvious cult war stuff, and so covered by FOXNEWSPOLITICS. Something doesn't have to be exactly labelled by the source for it to apply. --
5781:
5766:
4900:
2678:
657:
653:
649:
645:
641:
637:
633:
629:
625:
265:
132:
100:
14313:
14011:
13997:
13936:
13893:
13487:
I doesn't seem a very convincing case to me. How does this show it is unreliable for the sorts of things one might hope it would be reliable for?
12641:
12606:
12588:
11224:
11046:
9590:
9216:
Israeli government censorship is intense. Haaretz once published an article with all the censored text blacked out, just to illustrate the issue:
7753:
5440:
4696:
On the article's talk page, I proposed creating two citation bundles to avoid WP:OVERCITE: one for academic sources and another for news sources (
3951:
3549:
3469:
14087:
chiropracter, James Wilson, and written from the perspective of adrenal fatigue being real. This makes the article unreliable in a lot of ways.
13693:
13116:
Reading this and the DYK I'll just say if Snopes have an article on the factoid then it should be considered at least slightly controversial. --
12983:
12932:
12148:
12079:
7964:(Sara Netanyahu claimed that "There is news", Hagari: "I do not know of any information that kidnappers will escape from Philadelphi Corridor"),
6427:
2742:
2719:
406:
14435:
14335:
14174:
14160:
13501:
Every major detail in the article is wrong and often in implausible ways. Some errors may be mistakes, but many seem like outright fabrication.
11826:
11811:
11662:
11417:
10433:
8379:
There were four complaints, including 15 breaches against the paper and I could only find four breaches upheld. All of them were for inaccuracy.
8306:
5527:
5463:
While looking through this RSN, I think the last RSN on Lockley has been seldom mentioned despite it being a clear consensus - save one editor.
5425:
5406:
5392:
4788:
This is the RSN notice board. Why do people keep bringing up general questions about this issue, dodging the basic question, is the book an RS?
4474:
4431:
4416:
14053:
13395:
13145:
12497:
Thank you, Yes the story is quite new and developing. I am sure in the coming days, further reliable sources will be reporting on the events.
12301:. However, because Larabel doesn't yet qualify for the exception as it is written in policy, I can't support this reassessment at this time. â
11941:
11260:
11238:
11212:
11205:
10188:
9667:
conduct during IPSOâs investigation was unacceptable. The Committeeâs concerns have been drawn to the attention of IPSOâs Standards department.
8099:
6550:
6251:
This is quite clearly a culture wars political issue: going after a scholar with anonymous attacks because she promotes racial equity in STEM.
4275:
to the other doesnât change that. Encyclopedia Britannica actually makes the case that Yasuke was a samurai, so it is stronger in that aspect.
3936:
3532:
CNN: "When feudal Japanâs most powerful warlord Nobunaga Oda met Yasuke, a black slave-turned-retainer, in 1581, he believed the man was a god"
369:
13687:
12707:
How accepted and high-quality reliable sources use a given source provides evidence, positive or negative, for its reliability and reputation.
10683:
Nobody is suggesting we ban all these sources. We are suggesting that the specfic and quite substantial problems that have been indicated for
9456:(they span June--September 2024) say -- it's appropriate to say the source is yellow, but it's hardly become now-and-retroactively unreliable.
7825:
7665:
7646:
6520:
6506:
5967:
5938:
5849:
5831:
5817:
5799:
4459:
4445:
3901:
2963:
2959:
14408:
Given the uses to which I've seen it recently put to use, WP:EXPERTSPS probably wants some serious re-evaluation. I can see a place where we
11428:
10799:
10785:
10088:
9891:
9844:
Jewish Chronicle is an old and storied institution. Reliability is not determined by the number of employees or subscribers, or circulation.
9839:
8951:
8598:
The discrepancy between people (a higher number, as noted by Boynamedsue) and breaches is that some breaches relate to more than one person.
7212:
6624:
Yep. Fox News covering the intersection of science and culture-war politics is, well, it's not a circumstance in which we can cite Fox News.
6308:
6237:
The cited article is not politics news reporting. Is there something specific about the reporting or the article which is concerning to you?
5684:
5492:
4682:), which is TL;DR. They didn't achieve consensus and recently began removing sources without providing an explanation in the edit summaries (
4547:
3524:
3066:, and there is general consensus that it is unreliable, and due to persistent usage, it has been suggested to be deprecated or blacklisted. â
2955:
14403:
14367:
14291:
I was looking for some feedback about the Reliability of Syllabi as a source for Knowledge. In particular, there has been an attempt to use
13255:
The Presbyterian Church and Mt. Zion were built "after 1763 when the town was inhabited by the French" (about one hundred years too early).
13169:
11443:
10945:
10930:
10882:
10505:
10466:
10451:
10401:
10386:
10369:
10311:
10272:
10241:
9977:
9656:
9360:
8563:
8489:
8438:
8417:
8403:
8374:
8359:
8338:
8321:
8285:
5950:
5735:
5140:
4607:
4508:
4493:
4284:
4269:
4249:
4231:
4213:
4178:
4090:
4073:
4058:
3569:
3003:
13794:
per the paragraph is not allowed as a reliable source. I believe this source I have used reliable as it's literally the law enforcement of
12995:
https://www.naplesnews.com/story/news/local/communities/marco-eagle/2016/08/03/strange-but-true-andrew-jackson-and-cursing-parrot/87926936/
7437:
7401:
7276:
7145:
7111:
7029:
6870:
6679:
6613:
6588:
6574:
6474:
6456:
6442:
6390:
6050:
6020:
6006:
5991:
5873:
581:
12885:
The NBA is so widely covered, so I don't think we need to be lax on a source's reputation. I'll see what others' perspective is. Thanks.â
11372:
9758:
6647:
6633:
6599:
details 52 instances in which Boaler allegedly misstated or misconstrued outside studies about learning, neuroscience, and math education
6401:
Rufo and conservative media outlets have published multiple accusations of plagiarism and research misconduct Theyâve all been backed by
5472:
4402:
3881:
3762:
as a bludgeon to ensure that the article/discussion is dominated entirely by the ouroboric recycling, in popular media, of what is -- as @
3591:
That is an essay, and does not trump policy. Yes we can judge a source where is (for example) goes against widely accepted consensus (see
3166:
an established subject-matter expert, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable, independent publications
14504:
14263:
14207:
13991:
13887:
13785:
13773:
13681:
13582:
13389:
13139:
12926:
12635:
12582:
12142:
12073:
11805:
11656:
11434:
editorial disagreement. Let's stay on topic and avoid false equivalencies. This scandal obviously makes the Jewish Chronicle an outlier.
11410:
11304:
11199:
11030:
10901:
10868:
10831:
10735:
10719:
10701:
10678:
10203:
10182:
10148:
10038:
10022:
9682:
8882:
8843:
8829:
8801:
8684:
8632:
8607:
8579:
8548:
8530:
8093:
7898:
7861:
7747:
7178:
7090:
6811:
6705:
6190:
6156:
6108:
5542:
5521:
4929:
4894:
4625:
4593:
4361:
4150:
4129:
4107:
4037:
4017:
3998:
3980:
3965:
3868:
3668:
3480:
TLDR; until someone else has a secondary sourcing about Yasuke, can't really do much else... best you can do if someone hates lockley is
3197:
2776:
2713:
2672:
435:
208:
50:
14469:
13951:
13859:
13653:
13473:
Good work... but it might serve us better in the long term as an essay easily pointed to than somethingin the archives of this page. --
12542:
12527:
12511:
11176:
I don't see anyone giving the opinion that it's always been unreliable so I don't think it's needed, but these are just vague ideas. --
11122:
10346:
10329:
10131:
9497:
9104:
9063:
7790:
6998:
6956:
6894:
5910:
4134:
I donât understand what you are saying. What are the two sources that you are talking about? I suggest that you look at the lead at the
3031:
2641:
14382:
isn't reliable", I wanted to make sure that was actually the case. In particular, the editor is taking the fact that the syllabus says
12235:
I think that is a good argument, but it doesn't exactly fall into the letter of the existing SPS policy exception as Newslinger notes.
12212:
means we can easily remove the source when its claims are disputed by the subject while still using the source to fill in the details.
12112:
11504:
10569:
10553:
10104:
9396:
9044:
7819:
7365:
5956:
5375:
4971:
4797:
4783:
4769:
3877:
Don't mind the paraphrase/quote at all. Appreciate the mention. Any pronouns are fine. May post a comment at the bottom of the thread.
3651:
3635:
3604:
3586:
445:
364:
213:
14452:, then that's outside the scope of this noticeboard. On the article Talk page, you may want to ask 3rd opinions from the wikiprojects
13360:
13346:
12953:
12506:
11526:
10766:
10074:
10056:
10044:
9873:
9855:
9825:
9624:
9515:
9502:
I would advise waiting at least a little while for the dust to settle before starting an RFC. Reliability is about a source's overall
9483:
9206:
Speaking of Qatar-funded Al Jazeera, it's a little-known but markworthy fact that Qatar is ranked about 20 places above Israel in the
9013:
8960:
8266:
8129:
7772:
7714:
7704:
7632:
7382:
7347:
7062:
7047:
6692:
It's clearly a political story in context (by being at the crux of a major culture war issue), so no, it's not usable. It's obviously
6356:
6282:
6264:
6246:
6232:
6068:
5921:
5719:
5704:
5180:
4825:
4717:
4579:
4562:
2943:
13532:
13518:
12868:
12846:
12166:
12025:
11918:
11474:
11460:
11151:
10853:
10650:
10623:
10609:
10490:
10116:
9993:
9962:
9924:
9908:
9605:
9407:
9201:
9176:
Retractions are important. Stealth edits and stealth non-retractions (such as Al Jazeera's recent ones) are a sign of unreliability.
9089:
8065:
7587:
5845:
5813:
5762:
5558:
2951:
2947:
2758:
410:
13496:
13468:
13448:
13434:
13410:
13111:
12375:
12041:
11875:
11861:
11845:
10754:
10532:
9629:
The 2021 Cathcart piece in RS Byline Times that you link Andromedean says 28 breaches in 3 years. The quote you give comes from the
9539:
8198:
6447:
Please stick to the article in question. This is not the Inside Higher Ed article. There is no mention of Trump, Rufo, Harris, etc.
5953:
2927:
14184:
is starts with 'By editing', if someone objects discuss it with them and use a noticeboard like this if you need further input. --
14143:
Not sure if the source can be used in this way, but if it can be I would propose either of the following: "Symptoms that have been
13826:
Anyone with information is asked to call Peterborough Police at 705-876-1122 x555 or Crime Stoppers at 1-800-222-8477 or online at
13551:
13275:
Alston Grocery (shown in a photograph) is described as "a rusted lonely red cabin that survived" bombardment during the Civil War.
12968:
12894:
12827:
12740:
12410:
11970:
11627:
11395:
10226:
Even in cases where a resolution was agreed such as this, the word 'abused' a Jewish MP was changed to 'challenged', quite a change
9701:
9610:
I guess I should amend my comment, as it presumes the current (or recent) rating of JC is reasonably accurate. Looking through the
9584:
9568:
9469:
8040:
7605:
6928:
6913:
5261:
4848:
4754:
4683:
4317:
It seems to me that all of these edits did more then just remove the source, they also removed claims solely sourced to that source
3344:
193:
13482:
11740:
11726:
11710:
11107:
10749:
10586:
10223:
02822-18 Sivier v The Jewish Chronicle Complaint Summary 9 August 2018 Outcome Breach - sanction: action as offered by publication
10047:
that they have "concluded" their "thorough investigation". Now they might yet again be lying, but I suggest that we believe them.
9796:
9730:
9446:
9305:
9296:
9268:
9258:
8932:
8916:
8902:
8783:
8642:
8251:
8156:
8109:
7423:
5902:
5146:
4436:
I am reminded of the Isaac Asimov story âThe Dead Past,â which lets you only see "historical" events, as in 1 second in the past.
14535:
14101:
14027:
13312:
12492:
12348:
12318:
9544:âThe coarseness and aggression of the JCâs current leadership is such a pity and does such a disservice to our community,â wrote
9187:
9171:
9157:
9124:
9072:
8765:
6341:
6322:
5248:
long ago something was or how prestigious the newspaper is. It also depends on the context in which it appears in the newspaper.
4942:
One thing worth pointing out is that a few people here and on that talk page are arguing that they don't feel source X or Y as a
4701:
4697:
536:
306:
13332:
13070:
13049:
13037:
12230:
11850:
9431:
8025:
7319:
7234:
6347:
because she promotes racial equity in STEM". I haven't seen any reporting that suggests that's what is actually happening here.
6201:
I can't speak for the motivations at Fox News. I can only say that I think Boaler's response is an important part of the story.
5888:
3011:
3007:
2511:
13165:
13096:
12246:
11386:
But yet Al Jazeera is ok when it's clearly not a reliable source. It's just the pro-Israel sources that are a problem - right?
11363:
that is published is misinformation and trying to correct it is outside our scope. (And what would we even replace it with?) --
11085:
10440:
2021 we discussed the JC based on its record of publishing misleading content on the British left, Muslims and Palestine/Israel
10416:
In the past, we deprecated a source because it published a false news story that had appeared in most mainstream media sources.
10220:
03222-18 SuĂĄrez v The Jewish Chronicle Published date 12 April 2019 Outcome Breach - sanction: action as offered by publication
9390:
9324:
8327:
8236:
8005:
7292:
7262:
6774:
5641:
2936:
529:
301:
95:
13292:
13243:
After the Civil War, the town underwent "a rebuild and it was decided that a railroad would be constructed" across the river.
12467:
9474:
Ordinarily I would agree but with the history here plus the lack of transparency, I think there's a problem beyond the usual.
9453:
8588:
Crucially, wherever the breach has been upheld a sanction has been volunteered or applied, meaning in the case of the JC that
6880:
6663:
6219:
FOXNEWSPOLITICS describes what the community's consenus is and why Fox is considered to be generally unreliable for politics.
4322:
Addition (or changes to) text, not just adding or removing sources 'who served as a samurai ', I really need to go no further.
3203:
3054:
is an amateur blog about astronomy that is cited on many pages about astronomical objects. This website has been discussed at
14530:
13699:
11687:
Mid-2021: The first letter is sent demanding a formal standards investigation. This is rejected (after a five monthsâ delay).
11095:
9805:
8510:
8142:
this source for anything related to the IsraelâPalestine conflict (and possibly anything related to the Israeli government).
6653:
6546:
2613:
462:
203:
142:
13617:
13004:
11776:
11538:
10636:
for anything related to Israel/Palestine, and I'd be happy to extend that to "UK politics biographies of living persons". --
6366:
5342:
5316:
3432:
14386:
as evidence that not all Geji engaged in sexwork, however, the syllabus only says that their sexual services weren't their
12694:
10217:
01740-19 White v The Jewish Chronicle 29 November 2019 Outcome Breach - sanction sanction: action as offered by publication
8648:
8635:
that he forgot to put quotation marks around his search term and thus got an inflated number for The Times for this period.
7504:
6716:
I would like to thank everyone for their feedback. There has some strong constructive input from various editors including
6269:
Do you have a source that says the anonymous attacks are due to the fact that she promotes racial equity in STEM? That's a
5366:
Its not an RFC, and we really can't answer such a general question, what is needed is a specific RFC about just this book.
3893:
3338:
3090:
3084:
2921:
2842:
2579:
541:
281:
198:
13918:
13791:
13084:
which already throws doubt on an "article" that is just a colleciton of trivia. Would not consider a usable fact on WP. --
11531:
The coverage of the present scandal is awash with references to things having been out of kilter at the JC for some time.
10290:
7020:
sources (see article for more sources) you'll find that culture war issues are essentially absent from the issues raised.
5324:
on a lot of stuff, including context, attribution, and so on. Not all news sources are equal and not every section of the
5242:
10840:
and then again in 2023 and finally now â drawing past victims to issue a statement calling again on the regulator to act.
3773:
contentious -- but to suggest "recycled, unsourced claims in the popular media, on a topic not in their wheelhouse, must
3023:
3019:
401:
326:
181:
112:
9162:
I've seen dozens if not hundreds of discussions on this noticeboard and invariably retractions are seen as a good sign.
3956:
I would say that if multiple news sources make a similar claim then those can be used if not other better sources exist.
2724:
That was basically my feeling too. I'm hoping this sparks a conversation that (eventually) leads to it being put on the
11534:
The writers who have resigned have referenced their longstanding unease about the Jewish Chronicle's unknown ownership.
10956:
More press coverage today from The Jerusalem Post, The Forward, Press Gazette, The Independent and The Times of Israel
9231:
9130:
7477:
6579:
The use of the word equity does not make this a political article. Which reference paper was a scientific publication?
3142:
2815:
2552:
514:
509:
494:
331:
321:
286:
157:
13523:
So what? Nobody in their right mind would expect a non-american newspaper to give authorative information about that.
10334:
8700:
These are all different cases from the ones listed under "The Jewish Chronicle". The ones listed under thejc.com are:
8468:: The first letter is sent demanding a formal standards investigation. This is rejected (after a five monthsâ delay).
8242:
is in effect run for propaganda purposes and frequently publishes falsehoods. This is obviously going to happen again.
7507:, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.
5337:
5068:
5002:
I see no reason why not (as long as they otherwise count as RS), they can do the research, or even talk to historians.
3288:
2845:, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.
2582:, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.
14283:
13925:
https://pressprogress.ca/canadas-far-right-is-targeting-south-asian-and-sikh-canadians-to-incite-anti-immigrant-hate/
13624:
10740:
Agree as well. How often is JC been cited on Knowledge? Do we have any examples of uses that should be questioned?
8698:
7303:
7245:
quotes one of the founders as saying they have a "reputation as a clearing house for data dumps on far-right groups".
5549:
Agree BAD RFC. Interesting discussion, but maybe on another location and not here. Seems to be more of a discussion.
5298:
5276:
5252:
5165:
4188:
At some point, the in text citation was moved to the end of the paragraph. After that the CNN citation was restored.
3027:
519:
452:
348:
341:
291:
14350:. In future, please provide the actual context for your source in question, including the article and proposed edit.
12731:
and how Maven, which is now the Arena Groupâwhich also owns Fadeaway Worldâwas even hiring high schoolers to write.â
8506:
5804:
I don't understand. I'm suggesting that we cite the Fox source for the denial. Am I dancing around or plagiarizing?
4996:
3269:
11950:
Is Phoronix any more reliable than any other blog? No, not really. It's a blog, just a technical blog, essentially
8753:
7017:
6552:
6534:
5926:
Actually, that refers to the previous allegations. Inside Higher Ed covered this specific set of allegations here:
5360:
3460:
generally, unless if you can prove otherwise, news articles are generally assumed to be useful secondary sourcing.
3415:
3366:
3015:
152:
117:
13627:
11670:
These attempts to find loopholes isn't a good look. First there's an attempt to find a cut off date. However, the
10013:
not involved, but perhaps, this paper is too small or too intent on not being open about it, for whatever reason.
6711:
6667:
6527:
A Stanford professor, who was one of the thought leaders behind San Francisco's removal of algebra in junior high
5073:
5012:
4584:
So the question then is what relevance does this line of argument have, as this is (unequivocably) about history?
3230:
14525:
14500:
14259:
14203:
13987:
13883:
13769:
13677:
13642:⊠a team of independent surveyors who have been responsible for the revision of several summit heights on OS maps
13385:
13308:
13173:
I want to offer an analysis of an apolitical article for future editors to reference. The chart below compares a
13135:
12922:
12842:
12631:
12578:
12138:
12069:
11801:
11652:
11300:
11195:
10178:
9301:
Yikes! I wish I knew that subscription thing years ago. Anyway, I confirm that a sentence was silently changed.
8089:
7894:
7857:
7743:
7174:
7086:
6807:
6186:
6152:
6104:
5822:
Apologies, then I misinterpreted your statement to mean not using the source at all; you just meant "to expand".
5564:
5517:
4925:
4890:
3226:
3193:
2709:
2668:
553:
504:
457:
316:
238:
127:
43:
13729:
in the literature on an equal footing with the vast majority of sources that do not mention the name. See also
12255:
guideline), but it does not override the expectation that reliable sources should have editorial oversight. The
11696:
July 2023: A second letter is sent demanding a standards investigation â but it is brushed off after two months.
10214:
05411-19 Lennox v The Jewish Chronicle 16 January 2020 Outcome Breach sanction: action as offered by publication
9861:
5119:
3560:, we do not get to judge RS unless we can show they make stuff up, not just disagree with one (not all) expert.
2647:
There was no approval of the page. It was a redirect, and converted into an article. Doing so skips NPP and AfC.
13720:
User:Fowler&fowler/Sources_that_do_not_mention_the_victim's_name_in_the_Kolkata_rape_and_murder_August_2024
11623:
11256:
11147:
11081:
10827:
10697:
10646:
10605:
9792:
9678:
9564:
9386:
9292:
9254:
9153:
9143:
Doing those two things would be a good start. Along with being transparent about who finances their operation.
9024:
The "reporter" also made false claims about his background that the paper never bothered to verify. It's not a
9009:
8898:
8825:
8779:
8680:
8526:
8232:
8152:
8001:
7488:
7392:
site) is covering what appears to be a 4 person rally to ban astroturf. This is not what we need at wikipedia.
5272:
4844:
4821:
4713:
3121:
2826:
2563:
440:
384:
336:
255:
218:
11325:
Perhaps our time would be better spent discussing how to deal with misinformation in mainstream publications.
9554:
The problems seem to date back to the 2020 change in ownership. Would this make an appropriate cut-off point?
8505:
I am unable to see 16 upheld complaints against The Times on the website you linked to. This is what I found:
8312:
is one breach every 7 issues. The Mail and even The Sun are far more credible in terms of factual reliability.
6989:
about it by Peter Woit. Brian Conrad's comments on the blog post, in particular the second one, are relevant.
3819:
to infer anything from their being news media puff-pieces which all reference one or two original / academic
14346:
13899:
13401:
I will admit maybe I was confused, is this arguing that they are generally reliable or generally unreliable?
13261:
13082:
12251:
Being cited by other reliable sources for factual claims is one indicator that a source is reliable (per the
11851:
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Adwaita_%28design_language%29&diff=1245507291&oldid=1232781085
11359:-sensitive things), but ultimately we're an encyclopedia. Our job is to summarize, not report. Deciding that
10317:
10211:
03690-19 Davies v The Jewish Chronicle 2 April 2020 Outcome Breach sanction: action as offered by publication
8051:, this publication seems to have a knack for getting itself into trouble. As I said in the linked discussion
7971:
5841:
5809:
5758:
5587:
5582:
4691:
Secondary scholarly/rigorous work supercedes non-secondary and/or non-scholarly/rigorous work in WP generally
3577:
applies here. (And see pretty much every guideline on RS -- we absolutely do judge RS -- it's not a binary.)
260:
248:
243:
11243:
Looks good â the only thing I am not sure about is the dates. What is the rationale for using 2019 and 2021?
11043:, The Independent, 16 September 2024 (appears to be a republication of Rusbridger's previous Prospect piece)
4733:-- in an academic topic (like very elusive histories) we don't need an academic source to be saying what is
3385:
3315:
14223:
14170:
14133:
12463:
11693:
April 2023: The IPSO complaints panel again refers it to the standards department for unacceptable conduct.
11351:
has issues, we do have a few options (mostly relying on even higher-quality sources, when they appear, for
9054:. What counts is the quality of the investigation and subsequent actions, so I think we should wait a bit.
9033:
8021:
7642:
7419:
7361:
7315:
7246:
7043:
6909:
6405:, and theyâre all against officials or scholars at prestigious institutions who either work in DEI or have
6337:
6304:
6260:
6228:
6046:
5869:
5700:
5591:
5488:
5421:
5388:
4222:", yes as that is where all those other sources get the claim, they are talking about the primary sources.
3932:
3489:
3465:
3117:
2971:
524:
394:
186:
9735:
Systemic issues â this is a common refrain in the criticism: that the material published is not political
9355:
Columnists Quit Jewish Chronicle as Troubled Paper Severs Ties With 'Journalist' Over Debunked Hamas Story
9051:
This happens sometimes even with the best sources, the NYT Caliphate debacle immediately comes to my mind
8422:
I am only counting from 2022 because you wrote, "only the JC breached IPSO's code 15 times in two years."
7930:
Channel 12 refutes report Sinwar planned to smuggle himself, hostages out of Gaza via Philadelphi Corridor
7838:
both have media guides about South African news media, neither of which mention the The South African. --
7660:
Well I have looked into this particular author and it seems he has done it again in a later article about
13599:
13223:
The town was "ruined by the American Civil War", framing it as the singular result of Union cannon fire.
13167:
8756:
since 2020 listed under "thetimes.co.uk" (none under thetimes.com). This means JC and Times actually had
7724:
unreliable or deprecate them, but it does show the source should be shown more scrutiny if it's used. --
7447:
7218:
4529:
Sure, maybe, but no one contests whether something that happened centuries ago is news or history -- so @
4455:
4427:
4398:
4197:
The CNN article is not in the lead any more, but it is still used to support the claim about the stipend.
613:
389:
69:
14412:
want to include content sourced to monograms, and similar long form, in-depth, yet unreviewed, content;
14299:
13595:
8539:
In short, this is a red herring, whereas the new revelations raise serious concerns we need to address.
8346:
6947:
behind the recent wave of anonymous complaints against mostly black scholars studying race and equity. â
6361:
You're inventing a completely arbitrary standard for what counts as political coverage. Just looking at
4833:
as has been pointed out, they have been factually been misleading on key points for which they are cited
14486:
14245:
14189:
13973:
13869:
13755:
13738:
13663:
13502:
13371:
13249:
13121:
12908:
12617:
12594:
12564:
12429:"Vedic Hindu Cultural Society of BC's president apologizes after causing needless communal controversy"
12323:
12124:
12055:
11787:
11638:
11286:
11181:
10164:
8923:
The paper didn't do its job in the first place i.e. they didn't vet the freelance journalist properly.
8763:
Also worth mentioning: When I did the same search for "The Guardian" and "theguardian", I did not find
8075:
7880:
7843:
7729:
7671:
7160:
7072:
6982:
6939:
6793:
6729:
6172:
6138:
6090:
5596:
5574:
5503:
5064:
4911:
4876:
4727:
the news sources that Tinynanorobots is removing ... haven't been contradicted by any scholarly sources
3248:
3179:
2695:
2654:
609:
568:
311:
137:
122:
107:
77:
36:
17:
11560:
11131:
10229:
01612-18 Wadsworth v The Jewish Chronicle Complaint Summary May 2018 Outcome Resolved - IPSO mediation
9589:
The problems predate the change of ownership in April 2020. On the 4 August 2021, barely a year later
9488:
I think we need to start a RfC here, I can't seem to find the RfC which justified the reliable rating
4006:
The problem is not so much that the article recycles Lockley, but that it falsely represents his ideas
3626:
into a guideline -- fwiw a roughly similar hierarchy for publications exists in most academic fields.
14033:
13649:
13042:
Please read the article. My question is about the specific article, not the publication in general.
12512:
https://www.sikhpa.com/canadian-hindu-org-call-sikh-mps-ideological-opposed-persons-in-leaked-letter/
12386:
Hi I made an edit recently using this source and just wanted to check whether The Indo Canadian Voice
11424:
11330:
11271:
10926:
10897:
10864:
10781:
10715:
10674:
10501:
10429:
10397:
10365:
10268:
10199:
10144:
10084:
10018:
9973:
9887:
9835:
9652:
8839:
8797:
8603:
8575:
8544:
8434:
8399:
8334:
8302:
8262:
7433:
7378:
7343:
7192:
6494:
5628:
5312:
5136:
2763:
It's a Twitter aggregator with minimal human input, run by people on the fringe right. Not reliable.
296:
147:
14384:
appeal lay primarily in their surpassing musical and literary cultivation, not their sexual services
13603:
7333:
7327:
7128:
sources, from 2023 and 2021 respectively, have nothing to do with the 2024 Fox News article nor the
5618:
has reverted content three times on Jo Boaler over the last few weeks. The content is specifically:
4982:
Note can we here just express our preference, and leave any discussion to the above (main) thread)?
13151:
12394:
12381:
9230:
Jewish Chronicle writers quit, accusing it of prioritising politics over journalism" (the fifth is
8130:
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk/conclusion-of-jewish-chronicle-investigation-into-elon-perry-daaqr8b9
7102:
for the reader wanting to hear Boaler's side, a reference to the Fox article could be informative.
7067:
Reliable sources are required by article content, this would be a matter of consensus building. --
7058:
7025:
6827:
6770:
6721:
6643:
6584:
6516:
6452:
6352:
6278:
6242:
6206:
6124:
6064:
6002:
5963:
5934:
5917:
5837:
5805:
5777:
5754:
5715:
5680:
5538:
5436:
5285:
4672:
4603:
4504:
4470:
4450:
I was reminded of the adage that news is the first rough draft of history (or something like that)
4412:
4280:
4245:
4209:
4194:
4189:
4185:
4146:
4103:
4013:
3976:
3947:
3897:
3664:
3545:
3441:
3333:
3170:
I am an amateur space enthusiast of many years as opposed to someone who is academically qualified.
3138:
3079:
2916:
482:
13228:
The river began to change course when a sandbar formed around the time of the American Civil War.
13014:
which is "Part of the USA TODAY Network" (bottom of page). When you click on "Careers" it goes to
11211:
objectivity on the IHRA definition of antisemitism and the prevalence of Labour 'Antisemitism' as
5608:
3706:
Each source must be carefully weighed to judge whether it is reliable for the statement being made
14420:, seems somehow entirely misaligned with WP:RS; and with the purpose of creating a free (and not
14373:
14219:
14166:
14129:
11898:
10878:
8476:: The IPSO complaints panel again refers it to the standards department for unacceptable conduct.
8423:
7912:
7655:
7638:
5484:
5417:
5384:
5218:
be excluded from consideration as reliable sources in historical articles, but were the question
4862:
As I saw something said about this earlier in the discussion. Per the header of this noticeboard
3928:
3619:
depends on context; common sense and editorial judgment are an indispensable part of the process.
3485:
3461:
3284:
3046:
2770:
2596:
calls it a "Twitter aggregator and commentary website". That doesn't sound super reliable to me.
12597:
Could you further expand on this in simple terms per my question. Would be kindly appreciated.
10065:
Ought be treated as unreliable for anything remotely connected with Is-Pa and British Politics.
9913:
See TFD's comment above. It is not determined by age, true, but it IS determined by reputation.
9280:
And actually, we are in luck, because you can even view this article via the Knowledge Library:
8956:
When a news source refuses to divulge who owns it, I think we are entitled to assume the worst.
7988:
7836:
7191:
Commenting on school curriculum is often political discourse, so if the source is Fox News then
6879:
extremely harsh personal attacks connected with that dispute came from progressive sources. See
6011:
Fine. In that case we don't need the Fox News source at all, and we can close this discussion. â
4533:'s criterion is easily applicable, and we need not figure out whether "last week" counts or not.
14457:
14397:
14307:
14156:
13444:
13406:
13356:
13351:
But (and lol) how is saying that the town is in a location ("in another State") not incorrect?
13342:
12782:
All articles should be based on reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for
12387:
12342:
12311:
12224:
12105:
12018:
11911:
11613:
This is plainly incompatible with "green" status at WP:RSP â and plenty enough for an RfC now.
11391:
10795:
10762:
10070:
10052:
9869:
9821:
8947:
7609:
7545:
7133:
5731:
5468:
5402:
5371:
5328:
news source is equal; there's no way we could give a sweeping answer to something like this. --
5176:
5008:
4987:
4793:
4765:
4660:
4646:
4589:
4489:
4451:
4441:
4423:
4394:
4265:
4227:
4174:
4084:
4052:
3647:
3600:
3565:
2782:
2637:
499:
59:
10838:
9647:
The Telegraph piece is important to read on the agenda of the letter-writers and of Cathcart.
9349:
Three star Jewish Chronicle writers quit, accusing it of prioritising politics over journalism
9222:
Stealth edits are not great, but common across the industry. Take for example the Jewish News
5397:
The only one linked to here was not an RFC and was about the author in general, not the book.
3150:
I've nothing to add from the last time this came up, it's a blog written from what one person
14165:
This is helpful thank you. I'll see what others have to say but I really like that phrasing.
14041:
14007:
13947:
13932:
13912:
13855:
13837:
13795:
13733:
13588:
13578:
13514:
13215:
The town is in the "Mississippi River Delta" (which is in another state and 200 miles away).
12764:
12752:
12701:
12602:
12538:
12523:
12502:
12406:
12363:
11995:
11954:. It doesn't have any kind public editorial standards or fact-checking board. The reason why
11736:
11706:
11563:
by Tortoise Media as saying about Jake Wallis Simons, the Jewish Chronicle's current editor:
11522:
11470:
11439:
11406:
11352:
11220:
11118:
11103:
10941:
10849:
10619:
10582:
10565:
10549:
10462:
10447:
10382:
10342:
10335:
Exclusive: UK press regulator IPSO "carefully reviewing developments at the Jewish Chronicle"
10325:
10307:
10237:
10127:
10112:
9989:
9958:
9904:
9601:
9493:
9479:
9403:
9197:
9100:
9085:
8559:
8485:
8413:
8370:
8355:
8317:
8297:
anti-Semitism have been seriously questioned in reliable sources. We cannot ban all of them.
8281:
8247:
8169:
Jewish Chronicle investigating journalist accused of publishing disinformation about Gaza war
8061:
8036:
7786:
7768:
7141:
7107:
6994:
6952:
6924:
6890:
6883:
6866:
6675:
6629:
6609:
6570:
6470:
6438:
6386:
6016:
5987:
5642:"Stanford professor defends herself after being accused of 'reckless disregard for accuracy'"
5231:
5221:
5115:
5060:
4675:
4621:
4575:
4543:
4357:
4331:
this is correct, then we've gone from "a better source is being replaced with a poorer one" (
4204:. This is not true. All other secondary sources that mention it, point to Japanese sources.
4200:
One error the CNN article contains, is that it attributes the stipend, house and servants to
3913:
3864:
3265:
3222:
2477:
11681:
End of 2019: IPSOâs complaints panel reports the publication to IPSOâs standards department.
10657:
Mainstream media have run many obviously false stories in support of wars. For example, the
7956:
IDF investigates claim Jewish Chronicle published stories based on âfabricated intelligenceâ
3766:
correctly points out below -- actually just a very few actual (pertinent, academic) sources.
3476:
Talk:Yasuke/Archive_3#RfC:_Should_the_view_that_Yasuke_was_a_samurai_be_added_to_the_article
599:
14453:
13961:
13645:
13478:
13237:
13156:
Several places have framed the deprecation of the Daily Mail as political, comparing it to
13107:
12977:
12949:
12864:
12823:
12690:
12162:
11420:
11326:
11267:
10922:
10893:
10860:
10777:
10711:
10670:
10528:
10497:
10425:
10393:
10361:
10264:
10195:
10140:
10080:
10014:
9969:
9883:
9831:
9648:
8907:
That appears to be an opinion article. Certainly that quote is the opinion of the author.
8835:
8793:
8690:
8617:
8613:
8599:
8571:
8540:
8430:
8395:
8330:
8298:
8258:
7918:
7812:
7697:
7625:
7580:
7429:
7397:
7374:
7339:
5898:
5787:
5554:
5308:
5132:
3408:
3362:
3214:
2749:
Sounds like it just scrapes content from Twitter with minimal filtering by humans. Not RS.
2737:
2608:
14292:
13633:
published by enthusiasts. I donât necessarily disbelieve them; rather it may be a case of
12397:
apologized to the Sikh community after a letter he wrote to the Conservative Party Leader
12194:
11994:"Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established
10232:
This seems to be a systematic failure of factual reporting irrespective of the ownership.
8697:
cases since 2020 that are listed not under "The Jewish Chronicle", but under "thejc.com":
6743:. While I don't agree with everything they have said, their feedback has been invaluable.
6656:, which became a proxy for various political issues, including equity and social justice,
5263:
there's nothing wrong with the way news sources are currently used in the Yasuke article.
4655:
The point below about "it depends" is very valid, the question really is a bit too broad.
3529:
It isnât about Lockley, it is about CNN. I think a few quotes explains the situation well.
8:
14465:
14392:
14363:
14181:
14108:
Wilson, James L. (2014). "Clinical perspective on stress, cortisol and adrenal fatigue".
14037:
13547:
13304:
13182:
12986:
12876:
12838:
12772:
12488:
12371:
12264:
12209:
12201:
11985:
11871:
11857:
11841:
11822:
11772:
11748:
11500:
11368:
9782:
on an Israeli press interview with the (pseudonymous) writer of the now-removed stories.
9697:
9620:
9511:
9465:
9207:
7933:
7387:
If the source is widely agreed to be super biased, how could it be reliable? Seems to be
7054:
7021:
6986:
6823:
6766:
6759:
6701:
6639:
6580:
6512:
6499:
6493:
It's a story. It's also an evaluation of a scientific publication. That's both parts of
6448:
6348:
6318:
6274:
6238:
6202:
6120:
6078:
6060:
5998:
5959:
5930:
5913:
5827:
5795:
5773:
5745:
5711:
5676:
5534:
5432:
5356:
5333:
4967:
4779:
4750:
4599:
4558:
4500:
4466:
4408:
4304:
4276:
4241:
4205:
4142:
4125:
4099:
4069:
4033:
4009:
3994:
3972:
3961:
3943:
3755:
3660:
3631:
3582:
3541:
3520:
3481:
3437:
3433:
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/05/19/asia/black-samurai-yasuke-africa-japan-intl/index.html
3321:
3299:
3257:
3157:
3134:
3095:
3067:
2904:
2754:
2687:
2522:
2487:
2482:
587:
472:
379:
73:
11690:
2021- 2023: The Jewish Chronicle is found by IPSO to have committed eight more breaches.
11595:
I don't know how many more flashing lights and beeping alarms we should be waiting for.
11537:
Complaints related to this have been ongoing for some considerable time. (Yesterday the
11449:
9752:â because the publication refuses to say who they are. That is unusual to say the least.
9211:
9113:
have therefore removed his stories from website and ended any association with Mr Perry
8187:
Jewish Chronicle fires freelance journalist Elon Perry after false reporting on Gaza war
6556:
The anonymous complaint, as well as the university's response, are already mentioned at
5604:
2456:
601:
14440:
RS does not imply turning off your brain, and wp:expertsps is explicit in saying this:
14432:
14332:
14049:
13919:
https://www.peterboroughpolice.com/en/news/media-release-for-thursday-july-25-2024.aspx
13864:
Is there a context for where it's being used? It may not be usable for BLP details. --
13792:
https://www.peterboroughpolice.com/en/news/media-release-for-thursday-july-25-2024.aspx
13528:
13492:
13464:
13430:
13328:
13288:
13046:
13001:
12727:
12242:
12037:
11966:
11937:
11618:
11456:
11344:
11251:
11234:
11142:
11076:
10822:
10745:
10731:
10692:
10641:
10600:
10486:
10155:
10034:
9920:
9851:
9787:
9726:
9673:
9580:
9559:
9442:
9381:
9368:
9287:
9249:
9183:
9148:
9004:
8928:
8912:
8893:
8878:
8820:
8774:
8675:
8521:
8408:
Are you only counting from 2022? If not, the results page only shows 4 cases at a time.
8227:
8147:
7996:
7601:
7285:
7255:
7197:
5974:
5884:
5294:
5268:
5239:
5161:
4840:
4817:
4709:
3878:
3693:
3457:
Was a mess, did not pay attention to it all, no clue what the consensus was at the end.
3280:
3240:
2765:
2502:
2463:
2449:
2441:
591:
is important: supply the source, the article it is used in, and the claim it supports.
477:
233:
14379:
then maybe you should take an honest discussion of scholarly sources back to Talk:Geji
13960:, the details about living people in the artcile are still covered by BLP policy. Per
13260:
The Presbyterian Church was began by the residents who also initiated the founding of
12674:
12670:
11881:
8345:
The list you give actually states 13 separate breaches are upheld, but is incomplete.
8181:
UKâs Jewish Chronicle removes stories by writer accused of fabrications about Gaza war
7195:
applies and the material shouldn't be used. Doubly so if you're thinking about a BLP.
6549:, which was the source of the controversy here, has already been heavily politicized:
5098:
imagine some new guidelineâor advice to ignore current onesâwill come out of this...
14152:
13965:
13440:
13418:
13402:
13352:
13338:
13209:
12990:
12964:
12900:
12890:
12736:
12659:
11955:
11951:
11556:
11419:
My point is that no evidence has been shown that the Jewish Chronicle is an outlier.
11387:
10791:
10758:
10658:
10473:
10079:
Why British Politics specifically? The problem articles related to Israel-Palestine.
10066:
10048:
9865:
9817:
9167:
9120:
9059:
9028:
situation where someone who is a legitimate journalist gets caught making stuff up. (
8976:
8943:
8590:
the inaccuracies have been corrected and the articles as they appear now are accurate
8186:
7518:
6751:
in the article being disqualifying. I certainly appreciate this perspective as well.
6717:
5727:
5464:
5398:
5367:
5172:
5080:
5004:
4983:
4789:
4761:
4656:
4642:
4585:
4485:
4437:
4261:
4223:
4170:
3643:
3596:
3561:
2633:
2625:
2493:
While the consensus of several editors can generally be relied upon, answers are not
13790:
Hi, I've had an individual remove a paragraph from a Knowledge page suggesting that
12666:
5600:
5020:. This is somewhat "it depends", but I will post it here as it should be noted that
4256:
Addition (or changes to) text, not just adding or removing sources "who served as a
14449:
14448:
and not, what accords to an accurate portrayal of modern historical assessment per
14428:
14117:
14003:
13943:
13928:
13851:
13833:
13574:
13510:
13063:
13030:
12795:
12710:
As a background, the trend in newer sports sites is to hire inexperienced writers:
12598:
12519:
12498:
12459:
12402:
12398:
12393:"In September 2024, Satish Kumar, President of the Vedic Hindu Cultural Society in
11518:
11466:
11435:
11402:
11266:
people !voting for 2019+ might want to be more specific than the very broad AI/IP.
11114:
10937:
10917:
10881:, which is a pro-Palestinian source, this and other cases bankrupted the Chronicle.
10845:
10633:
10629:
10615:
10578:
10561:
10545:
10477:
10443:
10378:
10338:
10303:
10123:
10108:
9985:
9954:
9900:
9764:
9475:
9427:
9399:
9242:
9239:
9193:
9096:
9081:
9029:
8555:
8536:
have to downgrade all UK mainstream media and only use unregulated media in the UK.
8481:
8409:
8366:
8351:
8313:
8277:
8243:
8057:
8032:
8017:
7833:
7782:
7637:
Might be worth looking at the author's others writings too.. don't have time to rn
7415:
7407:
7357:
7311:
7137:
7103:
7039:
6990:
6948:
6920:
6905:
6886:
6862:
6671:
6625:
6605:
6566:
6466:
6434:
6423:
6382:
6333:
6300:
6256:
6224:
6042:
6012:
5983:
5979:
5865:
5696:
5615:
5348:
5111:
4959:
4742:
4617:
4571:
4539:
4353:
3909:
3874:
3860:
3712:
3592:
3574:
3503:
3436:
Yasuke that one can easily trace most ideas about him and all the primary sources.
3261:
3113:
2887:
2879:
2494:
12944:
it should not be used against a better source, used for notability, puffery, etc.
11866:
I'll add that Libadwaita was meant to be released in 41 but it was delayed to 42.
7940:'A Wild Invention': Jewish Chronicle's Report on Hamas' Plans Comes Under Scrutiny
5909:
The short answer is yes. In the BLP, it's sourced to the San Francisco Chronicle:
4679:
3927:
about what is and isn't due. Best to let questions of due and undue happen there.
3035:
2975:
2628:, a conservative Christian broadcasting corporation' so bias may be a concern too.
14095:
14079:
14075:
13474:
13103:
13092:
12945:
12860:
12819:
12686:
12336:
12304:
12287:
12272:
12218:
12175:
12158:
12098:
12011:
11904:
11722:
11047:
Jewish Chronicle stalwarts bail over UK paperâs ties to alleged Gaza war fabulist
10524:
9545:
9320:
8968:
8460:: IPSOâs complaints panel reports the publication to IPSOâs standards department.
8175:
Has the UKâs oldest Jewish newspaper become Benjamin Netanyahuâs propaganda tool?
7961:
7802:
7687:
7615:
7570:
7393:
7230:
5550:
4807:
I don't think an RfC is necessary: virtually everyone agrees that Lockley's book
3985:
My understanding from the article discussion threads is that it goes back to its
3623:
3398:
3358:
3260:, I'm sorry for not initiating the RfC myself. Just got problems a few days ago.
3172:
3161:
2967:
2729:
2621:
2600:
14481:
their sexual services not that those services weren't part of what they did. --
14444:. The policy is fine. If you are having problems conveying to an editor what is
14121:
13968:). The secondary sources appear reliable for any details they have reported. --
13807:
Peterborough Police are investigating after an incident early Thursday morning.
13267:
The church was "constructed by the Native Americans before" the French arrived.
13236:
The town's decline was exacerbated when the railroad bypassed it to run through
12805:
Base articles on reliable, independent, published sources with a reputation for
12551:
and doesn't appear to have had one before. In general reliability is handled by
11717:
or after a set temporal point, if the community deems such action necessary. --
11678:
2018-2019: IPSO finds that the Jewish Chronicle has breached its code 15 times.
11550:
10974:
10377:
legal obligation at the end of a long road of stubborn editorial recalcitrance.
8199:
Crisis at Jewish Chronicle as stories based on âwild fabricationsâ are withdrawn
7950:
Author of a Questionable Jewish Chronicle Article Comes Under Fire on Israeli TV
7013:
4678:
and I reverted their edits, and we had a discussion on the article's talk page (
4195:
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Yasuke&diff=prev&oldid=1243549402
4190:
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Yasuke&diff=prev&oldid=1241316774
4186:
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Yasuke&diff=prev&oldid=1238887725
3760:"we can't use any judgment re: sources but rather must parrot them religiously!"
3453:
Knowledge:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 447#Reliability of Thomas Lockley
14461:
14359:
14233:
13543:
13300:
12853:
12834:
12768:
12678:
12515:
12484:
12367:
12268:
12197:
11867:
11853:
11837:
11818:
11768:
11608:
Recent history of wild fabrications serving ultra-right-wing government â check
11496:
11364:
11127:
10978:
9693:
9689:
9616:
9507:
9461:
9025:
8472:: The Jewish Chronicle is found by IPSO to have committed eight more breaches.
8448:
8114:
This is the new statement marking the conclusion of the investigation, in full:
7976:
7679:
7661:
7555:
6785:
6781:
6725:
6697:
6314:
5823:
5791:
5691:
but her bad PR strategy doesn't make any of this due for inclusion in the BLP.
5578:
5352:
5329:
4963:
4958:
argument, since as soon as there's a dispute it immediately becomes a circular
4775:
4746:
4554:
4121:
4065:
4029:
3990:
3957:
3827:
I would argue against this, as said. To suggest that "no, these are all on the
3763:
3627:
3578:
3516:
3218:
2871:
2863:
2750:
2620:
make it sound particularly reliable. It's also 'founded by conservative pundit
14151:) include xyz." / "Claimed symptoms of the debunked disorder include xyz." --
12700:
Thanks for initiating this. For convenience, I'll post my prior points here.
6399:
describes this as part of an attack against scholars promoting racial equity:
4008:. This is shown by comparison of the CNN article with other works by Lockley.
595:
14519:
14445:
14391:
since when I searched the archive I did see some folks discussing syllabi as
14237:
14064:
14045:
14002:
Thanks got it. I have used the news articles instead now, much appreciated.
13957:
13726:
13634:
13630:
13524:
13506:
13488:
13324:
13043:
12998:
12548:
12252:
12237:
12188:
12179:
12092:
12047:
12032:
11989:
11976:
11961:
11933:
11614:
11452:
11356:
11247:
11230:
11138:
11072:
11061:
11041:
Who really funds the Jewish Chronicle? Why itâs troubling that we donât knowâŠ
11034:
10884:
As noted above, the Chronicle has since been sold and a new editor appointed.
10818:
10741:
10726:
10688:
10662:
10637:
10596:
10481:
10029:
9915:
9846:
9783:
9721:
9669:
9575:
9555:
9438:
9377:
9302:
9283:
9274:
9265:
9245:
9178:
9144:
9069:
9000:
8973:
Who really funds the Jewish Chronicle? Why itâs troubling that we donât knowâŠ
8957:
8924:
8908:
8889:
8874:
8816:
8770:
8671:
8517:
8223:
8143:
8119:
removed his stories from our website and ended any association with Mr Perry.
8106:
7992:
7922:
7278:
7248:
6822:
Thanks again for all the help. I will raise the broader topic there. Cheers!
6693:
6270:
6056:
5894:
5880:
5289:
5264:
5249:
5157:
5101:...so I might leave off responding here, after this, though of course anyone
4946:
because they believe it to be full of errors. That isn't, generally, a valid
4836:
4813:
4730:
4705:
4530:
4383:
3785:
3381:
3311:
3165:
3154:
3130:
2895:
2725:
2588:
2473:
26:
Noticeboard for discussing whether particular sources are reliable in context
10027:
Given the entire affair is less than 2 weeks old, correct? Maybe they will.
7338:
They may have aspects that would lead us to treat them as a primary source.
7326:
A paper describing them as an "anonymous hacker and surveillance collective"
6965:
broke the story points to a right wing source. (I checked that the story in
3843:-- ...is to suggest that one's job as an editor is to turn one's brain off.)
13611:
13509:). The railroad crossing is fictitious, and not chronologically plausible.
13193:
13178:
12960:
12886:
12776:
12757:
12747:
12732:
12556:
12256:
12191:
12185:
12003:
11886:
11880:
For this particular claim, the easiest policy-compliant solution is to use
10813:
10294:
10257:
10247:
9662:
9163:
9116:
9055:
8870:
8792:
Re The Guardian: it's not regulated by IPSO, but has its own arrangements.
8760:
since 2020 â with The Times publishing an order of magnitude more articles.
7529:
7514:
7268:
5740:
Since we are currently mentioning allegations of wrongdoing against Boalerâ
5235:
5194:
5029:
5021:
4955:
4947:
4943:
3828:
3778:
3722:
3610:
3557:
11981:
9615:
detrimental from the baseline rating since 2020, wherever that should be.
9192:
Except that it is not retractions being criticized, it's everything else.
8385:
11788-22 Gregson and Weiss v The Jewish Chronicle: s.24. complaint upheld.
7962:Ś©ŚšŚ Ś ŚȘŚ ŚŚŚ ŚŚąŚ Ś Ś©"ŚŚ© ŚŚŚŚąŚŚȘ", ŚŚŚšŚ: "ŚŚ ŚŚŚŚš ŚŚŚŚą Ś©ŚŚŚšŚŚŚ ŚŚŚŚ€ŚŚ ŚŚ€ŚŚŚŚŚ€Ś"
6539:
misrepresented the findings and/or methods of a number of reference papers
3711:
Additional guidance in the context of historical claims might be found in
13458:
13424:
13282:
13056:
13023:
12799:
12552:
12455:
11006:
9423:
9038:
8013:
7872:
I've left a notification of the RFC on the Project South Africa talk page
7411:
7353:
7307:
7035:
6901:
6740:
6362:
6329:
6296:
6252:
6220:
6038:
5861:
5692:
5381:
3109:
12050:. If it's being used for press releases they can be found elsewhere. --
11098:: Why a scandal at The Jewish Chronicle also goes to the top of the BBC
8391:
01447-22 Rahman v The Jewish Chronicle s. 26 complaint partially upheld.
8382:
20214-23 Lunn v The Jewish Chronicle: s. 36. complaint partially upheld.
6377:. Do these stories have nothing to do with politics because they aren't
4641:
Lets make this easy, as there seems to be some confusion over consensus.
3104:
per the discussions linked in the background section. I can see this is
3039:
76:. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see
13623:
It seems there may be something to the idea that OS isnât infallible:
13085:
12332:
12276:
12214:
11718:
11546:
10996:
10982:
9816:. There are MANY blogs out there with more employees and more readers.
9809:
9634:
9316:
8616:
I was looking at the last two years only (16 Sep 2022 to now), because
7564:
7226:
5048:
Magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses
4805:
So maybe a formal RFC is needed to ask the question is his book an RTS?
3769:
I think that's a misread of the guidelines in both letter & spirit.
3708:
in the Knowledge article and is an appropriate source for that content.
13505:
in no way resembles Native American religious sites in the area (like
11401:
What has this to do with the reliability of JC? Please stay on topic.
10095:
This is quite an grotesquely major scandal for a prominent newspaper;
9813:
9068:
Wait a bit for what? They claim to have finished their investigation.
8726:
11788-22 Gregson and Weiss v The Jewish Chronicle (published May 2023)
8443:
I did not say the 15 breaches were over the last two years, they were
7604:
article. I emailed the paper informing them of this but got no reply.
5742:"alleging Boaler had violated the research policies of the university"
14355:
13708:
11601:
Longstanding IPSO problems, exceeding those of the Daily Mail â check
10773:
8997:
Jewish Chronicle sacks writer over story that caused furore in Israel
6846:
6558:
5570:
4138:
page. Then you will see how the sources are used and in what context.
72:. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the
14460:, and perhaps an RfC if there's a suitable question to be resolved.
13455:
an analysis of an apolitical article for future editors to reference
11517:, that had to have its close rewritten as a result (December 2021).
11229:
That looks good to me. I suppose starting a RfC with those options.
8570:
Sorry, I forgot to use quotation marks and got an inflated number.
8456:
IPSO finds that the Jewish Chronicle has breached its code 15 times.
8388:
12610-22 Bunglawala v The Jewish Chronicle: s. 13. complaint upheld.
8210:
its editor, Jake Wallis Simons, and amid questions over who owns it.
7799:
consider it unreliable since they have continued to copy Knowledge.
3211:
too: Very clearly an unreliable source, even if it's a nice website.
2486:
unless the source is widely used and has been repeatedly discussed.
14417:
13704:
13015:
12559:, so most sources have never been discussed let alone had RFCs. --
11766:
Knowledge:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 440#cppreference.com
11515:
Knowledge:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 361#Jewish Chronicle
11068:
10661:
that Iraqi soldiers removed babies from incubators, NYT journalist
9361:
Jewish Chronicle writers attack publication after 'fabrication' row
8049:
Knowledge:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 438#Jewish Chronicle
7965:
6537:. As reported by Fox, the anonymous complaint contends that Boaler
5171:
Good point, the question is far too broad for a definitive answer.
4407:
I donât think anyone defines last week as history in this context.
3377:
3306:
597:
13573:
stories as bad in reliable sources on either side of the Atlantic.
8693:
Actually, things are even worse at The JC, because there are five
6845:
by itself is the reason to reject the Fox News article. That is a
13019:
12997:
is a reliable source. Additional opinions would be appreciated.
12959:
As an aside, SI has gone downhill after its move to freelancers.â
9235:
8738:
01735-20 Downing v The Jewish Chronicle (published December 2020)
8732:
01447-22 Rahman v The Jewish Chronicle (published September 2022)
8729:
12610-22 Bunglawala v The Jewish Chronicle (published April 2023)
7943:
5893:
I concur. The anonymous allegations and the denial seem UNDUE. â
4257:
4004:
to cite the "historical fiction" part of LockleyÂŽs book as fact.
2593:
13818:
The suspects are described as four males wearing dark clothing.
13281:
There are smaller errors, but those are the major ones. Thanks,
12401:
objecting to the visit of Canadian Sikh MP's to the temple. "
11465:
AJ is green per recent RFC and this discussion is about the JC.
6696:
sensitive besides, which would require a high-quality source. --
5105:
is welcome on my Talk page if they'd like to continue anything.
4868:
for general discussions unrelated to the reliability of sources.
3841:
it counts as 10/20/100x more bricks on the 'majority view' pile"
3788:
references in a reply below, this is extremely optimistic, heh.)
3251:. Deprecation indeed is necessary to keep this out of Knowledge.
2506:
for general discussions unrelated to the reliability of sources.
13827:
13725:
Are the two sources reliable and can they be used to determine
8747:
05411-19 Lennox v The Jewish Chronicle (published January 2020)
8623:
The Jewish Chronicle had four breaches since 16 September 2022.
8447:, part of the JC's long history of unreliability. I am quoting
8193:
Jewish Chronicle retracts allegedly fabricated articles on Gaza
4760:
a formal RFC is needed to ask the question is his book an RTS?
4135:
3924:
3427:
3244:
28:
13902:
regarding a hate crime. However there are 3 sources for this.
13731:
Talk:2024_Kolkata_rape_and_murder_incident#RfC:_Name_of_victim
10258:
Here is 05411-19 Lennox v The Jewish Chronicle 16 January 2020
8272:
Just to note, prior to this episode, the JC has been reported
3730:. . . Proper sourcing always depends on context; common sense
3696:
doesn't mind me paraphrasing a comment he/she made elsewhere:
602:
13011:
8744:
03690-19 Davies v The Jewish Chronicle (published April 2020)
8723:
20214-23 Lunn v The Jewish Chronicle (published January 2024)
8659:
The Telegraph now has a good summary of the scandal as well:
7224:
6638:
There is no science or culture war politics in this article.
5457:
3758:
says below, there is seemingly a persistent attempt at using
14059:
Clinical perspective on stress, cortisol and adrenal fatigue
13423:
Generally unreliable. No change from the current situation,
12388:
https://www.artsrn.ualberta.ca/MinorityMedia/items/show/1037
11754:
10892:
claim that someone had been expelled from the Labour Party.
10628:
Sorry, my mix-up. I didn't actually mean to contradict you,
10105:
the resignation of the newspaper's most prominent columnists
8741:
00074-20 Ali v The Jewish Chronicle (published October 2020)
6525:
Quoting the very first line of the Fox source (my bolding):
6119:
What specifically is the issue with the Fox News reporting?
3923:
There is plenty of free-form discussion on the talk page of
2852:
14341:
14325:
13171:
11761:
Knowledge:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 281#Phoronix
11574:
11040:
9611:
9354:
9217:
9077:
8996:
8662:
8507:
4 upheld complaints against The Times in the past two years
7949:
7939:
7666:
The article also appears to copy from the Knowledge article
5978:, a student newspaper. Not exactly bolstering the case for
8735:
29107-20 Bird v The Jewish Chronicle (published July 2021)
5412:
excluding/including the word samurai from the yasuke page.
3160:, if anything it's the opposite as per the discussions at
2490:
is assessed based on the weight of policy-based arguments.
13921:(this is the official police department for Peterborough)
11882:"Heaps of tweaks and improvements incoming with GNOME 42"
7554:
Publishes false or fabricated information, and should be
6851:
6765:
Input invited, and thank you everyone for participating!
5879:
both the allegations and her rebuttal should be omitted.
5660:
4327:
I don't understand your point here either, sorry! -- if,
3502:
generally reliable secondary sourcing for history -- see
13850:- There is also this noting the stress on "hate crime"
12091:
from the section title, as this request is not a formal
12046:
Yep a self published source without the requirements in
8712:
29092-20 Holborow v thejc.com (published September 2021)
6541:, which concerns a scientific publication. Are you sure
5380:
there has been one already somewhere in the archives of
13927:(This is another media company also reporting on this)
13337:
These seem to be omissions, not errors, your point is?
5207:
Just as no source is 100% reliable in all contexts; no
4809:
Yasuke: The True Story of the Legendary African Samurai
3158:
reputation for fact-checking and accuracyreputation for
13903:
11137:
I propose we brainstorm some possible RfC options ...
10438:
It seems strange to only count the last two years. In
10297:
over its libelling of Audrey White, with IPSO stating
6533:"Equity" is very much a part of DEI, which stands for
5744:âwe should mention her denial of the allegations (see
5632:
that Boaler has spoken to about this specific topic.
5431:
donÂŽt rely on Lockley that use samurai for the topic.
4335:) to "true, but also, the information from the better
14416:. But the use of various Tweets, hot takes and, yes,
13715:
Most major news sources do not mention the name, see
12267:
exception and I would support treating Phoronix as a
10300:
conduct during IPSOâs investigation was unacceptable.
8620:
was referring to the JC's four most recent breaches.
5460:
rather than from Mozambique as traditionally thought.
3239:
for deprecation. Actually I called out this first on
14074:
For some background I'm looking to improve the page
8047:
Looking back through the archives, the latest being
6365:
on Fox's website, the top stories include one about
4723:
There is literally no reason to remove these sources
4689:
The important point is this: I agree with SamuelRiv
4616:
I just didn't want to seem unfriendly, you know?...
10594:
ref given as a courtesy link). How does that sound?
10293:of its code over 3 years between 2018-2021. It was
10248:
03690-19 Davies v The Jewish Chronicle 2 April 2020
10097:
unknown owners who are likely right-wing ideologues
8709:
06399-21 Brace v thejc.com (published January 2022)
8706:
09574-21 Gauterin v thejc.com (published July 2022)
3474:... i guess this was the closest RFC about lockley
13822:This incident is being classified as a hate crime.
8806:Thanks, that explains the Guardian's clean sheet.
7271:on them. And I also see that a number of articles
6659:is explicitly referenced in the Fox News article:
5193:, the same with any other category of source; per
4978:Are news sources reliable for articles on history?
4169:can you provide a concrete example, as in a diff?
3422:Are news sources reliable for articles on history?
3108:to articles, so deprecation seems warranted here.
11339:Our standard for a RS is whether or not it has a
9984:Well its reputation is now in the gutter, so ...
5675:Looking to gather and integrate community input.
3715:(essay), WP:BESTSOURCES, and WP:SOURCETYPES. . ."
14517:
9864:. This is a new organization with an old brand.
9452:scandal and shakeup -- plus+minus one year from
8752:I also checked for "thetimes" domains and found
8703:14697-23 Friel v thejc.com (published July 2023)
7493:This page has been added to the following list:
7332:A paper describing them as "activist journalism"
5640:Grossman, Hannah; Lencki, Maria (1 April 2024).
4303:I think perhaps this is a misinterpretation of @
2831:This page has been added to the following list:
2686:used in that article wouldn't be appropriate in
2568:This page has been added to the following list:
12984:Template:Did you know nominations/Poll (parrot)
11932:article anywhere on what they're an expert on!
8715:28831-20 Ross v thejc.com (published June 2021)
8513:. Could you say how you arrived at your number?
7600:that appeared to have directly copied from our
6662:It quite evidently a political topic that both
6565:The Fox article adds nothing significant IMO. â
10632:; I'd conflated the two levels in my mind. So
8720:The ones listed under "Jewish Chronicle" are:
8326:Here's the list of those 15 alleged breaches:
6788:(as it's usual better attended then NPOV). --
5666:
5639:
13694:Southern Illinois Now & Channel New Asia
13252:in 1829 and Mt. Zion Baptist Church in 1851.
12454:. I would say this is probably not reliable.
10812:I count 10 breaches in the White case alone:
8626:Over the same period The Times also had four.
6854:in their culture war, and that the source is
4339:source is being stripped out along with it" (
3734:are an indispensable part of the process. . .
44:
14063:Before anyone tells me to just post this to
13594:that assertion in any reliable source. (see
11897:, which I have just added to the article in
11782:Is there a particular reason or dispute? --
11541:on the importance of transparent ownership.)
9078:Lost two of their top columnists as a result
7832:focused on the South African market. The BBC
6784:or as this is a living person you could try
4743:existing recommendations on history sourcing
13702:, the name of the victim is being cited to
11684:2020-mid-2021: IPSO finds 18 more breaches.
9830:Jayen did not. Andre made the comparison.
6371:Donald Trump's comments about Kamala Harris
5726:Also, if there are other sources use them.
5035:In general, the most reliable sources are:
3839:: whether there are 10, 20, or 100 of 'em,
14069:I already did and didn't get much feedback
12756:second point, I don't see anything on the
10961:The following discussion has been closed.
7612:that led to it's subsequent depreciation.
7538:Unclear or additional considerations apply
7513:Which of the following best describes the
4116:If people give you a hard time for citing
51:
37:
12901:reputation for fact-checking and accuracy
12612:there is disagreement about a source. --
11495:sources treat them as fairly reliable. --
11489:reputation for fact-checking and accuracy
11341:reputation for fact-checking and accuracy
11049:, The Times of Israel, 16 September 2024
9504:reputation for fact-checking and accuracy
4952:reputation for fact-checking and accuracy
4686:'s my complaint on their user talk page).
3451:we've already talked about lockley here:
2599:Is using Twitchy justified in this case?
14442:Exercise caution when using such sources
13786:Police Website Media Release as a Source
13542:single article is not a trivial thing.
12518:Would this also be considered as such ?
11980:. Phoronix is a blog solely authored by
11753:I would like to suggest the addition of
11577:saying the paper has "lost credibility",
11487:Reliability is about a source's overall
10814:https://www.ipso.co.uk/rulings/01740-19/
10318:ineffective the IPSO complaint system is
10295:referred to the IPSO standards committee
9212:ranked freest in the Middle East region.
6463:haven't seen any reporting that suggests
2480:, blacklisting, or other classification
14102:User:IntentionallyDense/Adrenal fatigue
7991:, saying an investigation is underway.
7491:from other editors for this discussion.
6937:. The story was initially published in
6670:describe as part of the culture wars. â
6604:Did you want me to go through all 52? â
5627:The claim is that the content violates
4343:)... which, surely, would just make it
2829:from other editors for this discussion.
2566:from other editors for this discussion.
14:
14518:
11113:I think we need an RFC at this point.
11062:After peddling lies, Jewish Chronical
9226:linked below: its headline now reads "
8429:I am just replying to what you wrote.
6422:In short, this is another hack job by
4704:), in my opinion without good reason.
3892:Oh good lord are we still doing this?
3747:make basic, incontestable inferences.)
14377:source and I wanted to check. As for
13700:2024 Kolkata rape and murder incident
12875:USEBYOTHERS was an example under the
12681:prove its reliability, and I believe
10360:contributors such as Colin Shindler.
7053:include, but I may be alone in that.
6874:edited 03:18, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
6654:2021 California mathematics framework
6562:, citing The Chronicle of Higher Ed:
6547:2021 California mathematics framework
5042:Books published by university presses
32:
14028:RFCBEFORE about revising RSPCRITERIA
8807:
7465:
7453:
7155:discussed somewhere appropriate. --
3685:See wp:or, we do not get to judge RS
2899:(not mutually exclusive with 3 or 4)
2803:
2791:
2540:
2528:
70:discussion, request, and help venues
9115:. What else should they have done?
7606:When I raised the discussion at RSN
6545:not reading the wrong article? The
4260:", I really need to go no further.
23:
13272:Alston is a former grocery store.
13181:cited in the Knowledge article on
11166:a/ Unreliable since 2019 for AI/IP
10246:I had a look at the first example
9363:, Israel Hayom, 15 September 2024
9131:Jewish News of Northern California
8666:, The Telegraph, 16 September 2024
8183:, The Times of Israel, 14 Sep 2024
8177:, Middle East Monitor, 13 Sep 2024
8171:, The Times of Israel, 12 Sep 2024
6273:claim, and needs proper sourcing.
5211:is 100% reliable in all contexts.
24:
14547:
14147:associated with adrenal fatigue (
13629:. Unfortunately these seem to be
13503:This red-brick, protestant church
13212:region of northwest Mississippi.
12002:has previously been published by
8394:What other breaches were upheld?
8189:, The Jerusalem Post, 14 Sep 2024
7987:The Jewish Chronicle have posted
7498:Knowledge policies and guidelines
7132:made against Boaler. You're just
6967:The Chronicle of Higher Education
4347:example of editorial malfeasance!
3164:. It's self published but not by
2573:Media, the arts, and architecture
14110:Advances in Integrative Medicine
13439:Then what is the point of this?
12438:a Hindu festival got leaked out.
12259:policy states that sources with
10975:commentary in The Jerusalem Post
9814:3,200 paid for print circulation
9351:, Jewish News, 15 September 2024
8993:Also, The Times has weighed in:
8965:For the ownership question see:
8808:
7469:
7457:
6535:diversity, equity, and inclusion
6367:Kamala Harris's presidential run
5103:who agrees with everything I say
5089:I think the answer is closer to
3804:", I mean "...not be questioned
2807:
2795:
2544:
2532:
58:
14094:Knowledge article in question:
13898:No its based on an article for
13081:Snopes says this is unverified
12184:Phoronix is regularly cited by
11169:b/ Unreliable since 2021 for IP
8347:The press gazette wrote in 2023
8214:negotiating position over Gaza.
5836:Gotcha. Thanks for explaining.
4311:claims, not the "servants" bit.
4079:just cite the pop history book.
3781:list" is a bridge too far, IMO.
554:Category:Knowledge noticeboards
14536:Knowledge requests for comment
14511:14:13, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
14470:15:25, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
14436:08:31, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
14404:08:05, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
14399:Brocade River Poems (She/They)
14368:06:26, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
14336:04:52, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
14314:22:52, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
14309:Brocade River Poems (She/They)
14284:Suitability of Syllabus source
14270:14:16, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
14228:18:11, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
14214:16:54, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
14175:01:23, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
14161:00:46, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
14138:21:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
14054:21:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
14012:17:26, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
13998:17:02, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
13952:18:22, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
13937:18:19, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
13894:16:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
13860:20:55, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
13842:19:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
13780:16:48, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
13744:17:18, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
13688:16:42, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
13654:13:19, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
13618:22:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
13583:17:47, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
13552:15:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
13533:14:42, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
13519:13:43, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
13497:08:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
13483:04:15, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
13469:13:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
13449:13:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
13435:13:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
13411:13:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
13396:12:51, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
13361:12:27, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
13347:12:24, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
13333:08:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
13313:04:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
13293:03:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
13146:12:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
13112:21:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
13097:17:57, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
13071:05:04, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
13050:17:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
13038:17:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
13005:15:00, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
12969:04:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
12954:04:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
12933:12:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
12895:04:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
12869:03:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
12847:03:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
12828:02:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
12741:12:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
12695:11:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
12642:16:32, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
12607:23:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
12589:12:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
12543:17:38, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
12528:15:39, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
12507:13:29, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
12493:04:19, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
12468:03:48, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
12421:
12411:02:09, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
12376:16:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
12349:15:58, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
12319:01:02, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
12247:21:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
12231:20:56, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
12167:04:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
12149:12:09, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
12113:18:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
12080:12:13, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
12042:21:05, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
12026:18:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
11971:09:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
11942:23:03, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
11919:19:19, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
11876:10:49, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
11862:10:46, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
11846:04:01, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
11827:21:19, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
11812:20:35, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
11777:11:24, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
11741:20:38, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11727:19:09, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11711:16:17, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11663:17:24, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11628:15:40, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11527:14:25, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11505:13:48, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11475:14:13, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11461:13:50, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11444:12:56, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11429:12:22, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11411:10:59, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11396:10:53, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11373:13:48, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11335:12:06, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11311:17:21, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11276:11:04, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11261:08:16, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11239:06:11, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
11225:20:06, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
11206:18:16, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
11152:16:51, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
11123:16:41, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
11108:16:35, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
11086:14:32, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
10995:Jewish writer and food critic
10946:09:27, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
10931:04:00, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
10902:11:46, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
10869:10:54, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
10854:04:48, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
10832:23:10, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
10800:16:11, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
10786:10:49, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
10767:15:36, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
10750:22:28, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
10736:22:22, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
10720:22:18, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
10702:10:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
10679:20:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10651:18:35, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10624:17:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10610:17:21, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10587:16:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10570:06:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10554:06:04, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10533:03:50, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10506:15:31, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10491:07:37, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10467:07:34, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10452:05:54, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10434:04:03, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10402:15:28, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10387:05:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10370:15:26, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10347:18:37, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
10330:16:47, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
10312:16:17, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
10273:14:21, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
10242:13:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
10204:12:09, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
10189:12:07, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
10149:09:19, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
10132:05:31, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
10117:09:10, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
10089:11:57, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
10075:07:50, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
10057:07:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
10039:00:52, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
10023:00:11, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
9994:05:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
9978:12:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
9963:06:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
9925:23:15, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9909:22:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9892:23:27, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9874:22:55, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9856:22:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9840:22:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9826:22:49, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9797:22:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9731:21:02, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9702:19:47, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
9683:16:49, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
9657:15:19, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
9625:16:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
9606:07:17, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
9585:21:03, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9569:18:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9516:13:51, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
9498:17:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9484:17:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9470:17:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9447:16:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9432:16:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9408:16:11, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9391:14:43, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9325:17:26, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
9306:09:05, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
9297:08:09, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
9269:00:49, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
9259:22:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
9219:Israel should be doing better.
9210:ranking. Overall Qatar is now
9202:20:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
9188:20:56, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
9172:20:45, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
9158:18:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
9125:20:28, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9105:05:13, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
9090:13:26, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9073:12:09, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9064:11:55, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9045:06:23, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
9014:08:16, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
8961:06:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
8952:04:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
8933:05:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
8917:04:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
8903:00:44, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
8883:00:32, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
8844:19:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
8830:17:11, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
8802:16:55, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
8784:16:11, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
8685:15:22, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
8608:15:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
8580:03:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
8564:05:07, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
8549:11:51, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
8531:06:55, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
8490:20:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
8464:: IPSO finds 18 more breaches.
8439:19:47, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
8418:05:41, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
8404:03:36, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
8375:06:42, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
8360:06:32, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
8339:23:10, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
8322:20:11, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
8307:19:38, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
8286:18:06, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
8267:17:39, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
8252:16:33, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
8237:16:05, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
8195:, Middle East Eye, 14 Sep 2024
8157:06:27, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
8110:04:16, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
8100:17:44, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
8066:15:55, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
8041:04:57, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
8026:15:45, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
8006:15:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
7921:(currently listed as green on
7905:14:14, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
7868:14:09, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
7826:Discussion (The South African)
7820:06:59, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
7791:07:30, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
7773:14:35, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
7754:14:09, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
7705:17:48, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
7647:14:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
7633:10:07, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
7588:10:03, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
7438:09:00, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
7424:04:08, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
7402:04:01, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
7383:05:35, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
7366:11:40, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
7348:19:50, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
7320:00:28, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
7293:23:40, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
7263:23:29, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
7235:23:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
7213:10:36, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
7185:19:12, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
7146:03:31, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
7112:19:51, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
7097:19:15, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
7063:18:36, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
7048:18:30, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
7030:18:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6999:17:47, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
6957:03:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
6929:19:20, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6914:18:33, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6895:18:11, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6871:17:21, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6832:15:57, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6818:15:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6775:15:40, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6706:04:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
6680:16:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6648:15:27, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6634:03:37, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6614:15:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6589:15:25, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6575:00:49, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6521:22:31, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6507:21:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6475:15:33, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6457:15:26, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6443:04:43, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6391:23:41, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6375:Harris's drug policy positions
6357:20:43, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6342:20:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6323:20:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6309:20:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6283:18:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6265:18:28, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6247:18:05, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6233:18:01, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6211:15:52, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6197:15:51, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6163:21:38, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6129:17:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6115:17:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6069:20:44, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6051:20:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
6021:16:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
6007:15:56, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
5992:23:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5968:18:16, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5939:17:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5922:17:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5903:16:56, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5889:16:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5874:15:58, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5850:17:08, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5832:17:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5818:16:39, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5800:15:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5782:15:48, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5767:15:40, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5736:15:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5720:15:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5705:15:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5685:15:14, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
5559:03:57, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
5543:14:06, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
5528:11:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
5493:21:04, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
5473:14:03, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
5441:13:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
5426:16:49, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
5407:15:12, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
5393:15:09, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
5376:14:55, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
5361:14:42, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
5338:04:07, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
5317:23:16, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
5299:21:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
5277:13:48, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
5253:13:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
5243:12:53, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
5226:, the obvious answer would be
5181:12:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
5166:12:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
5141:20:33, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
5120:14:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
5069:02:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
5013:12:18, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4992:12:23, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4972:04:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
4936:11:38, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
4901:11:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
4849:16:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4826:22:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4798:15:24, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4784:15:20, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4770:14:46, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4755:14:38, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4718:13:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4665:12:50, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4651:12:17, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4626:14:37, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4608:12:14, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4594:11:27, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4580:01:05, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4563:00:38, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4548:23:59, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
4509:15:34, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
4494:10:51, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
4475:17:11, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
4460:16:43, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
4446:16:35, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
4432:16:24, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
4417:16:25, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
4403:16:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
4387:13:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
4362:23:55, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
4285:16:56, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
4270:10:44, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
4250:14:07, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
4232:11:50, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
4214:06:54, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
4151:12:11, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4130:00:30, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
4108:17:06, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
4091:01:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
4086:Brocade River Poems (She/They)
4074:20:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
4059:20:20, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
4054:Brocade River Poems (She/They)
4038:16:17, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
4018:05:45, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
3902:00:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
3882:07:23, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
3869:23:42, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
3416:16:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
3386:21:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
3367:03:55, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
3345:02:44, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
3316:19:47, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
3289:18:02, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
3270:15:16, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
2836:Maths, science, and technology
2777:19:40, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
13:
1:
13956:Although the article isn't a
13900:Anti-Sikh sentiment in Canada
11134:out today. Essential reading.
9111:Ah, I didn't know that. They
8769:that concerned The Guardian.
7300:editorial independence policy
6838:Not a single person has said
6595:Chronicle of Higher Education
4179:13:20, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
3999:13:15, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
3981:09:29, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
3966:08:14, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
3952:06:02, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
3937:23:02, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
3918:21:03, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
3669:09:41, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
3652:17:14, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
3636:17:11, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
3605:16:50, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
3587:16:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
3570:15:52, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
3550:06:19, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
3525:17:02, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
3494:15:56, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
3470:15:46, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
3446:15:31, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
3231:05:29, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
3204:15:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
3143:12:09, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
3122:23:25, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
3091:23:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
2928:23:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
2759:02:26, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
174:Biographies of living persons
14531:Knowledge dispute resolution
14100:My sandbox for the article:
12475:These are sloppy judgements.
12006:, independent publications."
11984:, the lead developer of the
10316:It should also be noted how
9739:journalistic, but political
9633:of campaigning organisation
9420:nobody knows who owns the JC
9357:, Haaretz, 15 September 2024
8056:and I still have that view.
7476:Please consider joining the
7130:recent anonymous allegations
7014:| The Chronicle of Higher Ed
6969:was derived from the one in
5972:Three of those links are to
5565:Use of Fox News on Jo Boaler
5479:reiterating thoughts above,
5199:The reliability of a source
3133:which is not peer-reviewed.
2814:Please consider joining the
2551:Please consider joining the
7:
14122:10.1016/j.aimed.2014.05.002
13911:(this is the newspaper for
11448:It appears they might have
11163:2/ Addition considerations
10755:LinkSearch finds 5517 links
9454:all the reporter's articles
8999:, The Times, 15 Sep 2024 --
8511:as for The Jewish Chronicle
8201:, The Guardian, 14 Sep 2024
7958:, The Guardian, 12 Sep 2024
6961:I agree that the fact that
5191:context, content and source
3426:I have been working on the
2743:21:44, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
2720:20:47, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
2679:20:42, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
2642:09:41, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
2614:06:59, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
608:Sections older than 5 days
10:
14552:
14149:by those who say it occurs
14128:Any input is appreciated.
13698:In the Knowledge article,
13537:A publication as large as
13250:Rodney Presbyterian Church
12452:people getting internships
12271:source along the lines of
11674:provide a useful timeline
11349:all of mainstream coverage
8638:If you look further back:
8205:Quotes from The Guardian:
7715:Survey (The South African)
6971:The Washington Free Beacon
6963:The Washington Free Beacon
6940:The Washington Free Beacon
6077:This could be used for an
5667:Grossman & Lencki 2024
5045:University-level textbooks
3249:James Webb Space Telescope
3152:researched on the Internet
2439:
542:Discussions for discussion
18:Knowledge:Reliable sources
14424:inaccurate) Encyclopedia.
10724:I agree with TFD on this
9810:3,000 digital subscribers
9804:The Jewish Chronicle has
9778:The Times of Israel also
9524:This is not just recent:
8754:three additional breaches
8641:The Jewish Chronicle had
6977:attacks on Boaler's work.
6409:. Thereâs a reason heâs
3775:not be questioned at all*
2872:Additional considerations
582:list of perennial sources
579:, check the archives and
550:
425:
357:
274:
166:
85:
66:
12395:Surrey, British Columbia
12261:"no editorial oversight"
12208:Treating Phoronix as an
11757:as an unreliable source
10964:Please do not modify it.
9862:into liquidation in 2020
9573:I agree with SamuelRiv.
7478:feedback request service
7448:RFC on The South African
7267:Just noticed we have an
7219:Unicorn Riot reliability
5224:for articles on history?
3831:list & hence we are
3802:not be questioned at all
3484:a statement to lockley?
3056:this WT:ASTRO discussion
2816:feedback request service
2553:feedback request service
234:Scalable vector graphics
68:Knowledge's centralized
14374:Special:Diff/1246332563
13803:Assault Suspects Sought
13175:2019 Daily Mail article
11899:Special:Diff/1245895832
10879:The Electronic Intifada
6531:, is coming under fire
6407:studied race and equity
6397:Inside Higher Ed source
5260:. As I said here above
4745:and the previous RfC.
3777:because they're on the
585:for prior discussions.
78:formal review processes
14526:Knowledge noticeboards
14034:WT:RSP § It's RFC time
13248:Construction begun on
13185:, a rural ghost town.
12884:
12879:guideline, which says
12815:
12792:
12709:
11598:Unknown owners â check
11071:, 16 September 2024 --
10472:something at probably
10291:33 individual breaches
8649:11 breaches since 2020
7952:, Haaretz, 10 Sep 2024
7835:and Stanford Libraries
7134:shifting the goalposts
7122:Chronicle of Higher Ed
5753:
5625:
5056:
5039:Peer-reviewed journals
4729:: This is why we have
3732:and editorial judgment
3642:Is this an RS or not?
3064:this WT:AST discussion
3060:this WP:RSN discussion
2513:Start a new discussion
614:lowercase sigmabot III
569:reliability of sources
118:Centralized discussion
13913:Peterborough, Ontario
13796:Peterborough, Ontario
13705:Southern Illinois Now
13152:Daily Mail comparison
12880:
12803:
12780:
12705:
12595:ActivelyDisinterested
12547:This doesn't need an
12435:. 12 September 2024.
12382:Reliability of Source
12196:---both of which are
12000:in the relevant field
11996:subject-matter expert
11836:generally cited for.
11539:Jewish News chimed in
9527:From the Jewish News
8643:9 breaches since 2020
7684:so they can see too.
7672:ActivelyDisinterested
7548:for factual reporting
7532:for factual reporting
7223:Is this website a RS?
5749:
5620:
5052:Mainstream newspapers
5026:
4337:(ostensibly , anyway)
3835:to reason about them
3320:Okay, I'll do that. â
3106:regularly being added
3014:Reports - Knowledge:
537:WikiProject proposals
436:Committee noticeboard
385:Personal restrictions
370:Contributor copyright
209:Neutral point of view
13828:www.stopcrimehere.ca
13238:Fayette, Mississippi
13010:It's sourced to the
12725:article, it covered
12675:editorial guidelines
12671:fact-checking policy
12200:. The intent of the
11096:From the Independent
10523:due weight. Thanks!
9755:More reporting now:
8815:simple as possible?
7919:The Jewish Chronicle
7913:The Jewish Chronicle
7503:When discussion has
6945:"coordinated attack"
6861:scientific claims. â
6840:the use of the word
6430:of a few years ago:
6403:anonymous complaints
6373:, and another about
6363:the "media" category
5214:News sources should
3156:. It doesn't have a
2933:universeguide.com:
2880:Generally unreliable
2841:When discussion has
2578:When discussion has
2483:should not be opened
567:Welcome â ask about
495:Requests for comment
411:Requests for comment
375:Edit warring and 3RR
365:Conflict of interest
167:Articles and content
13904:https://w.wiki/BEXz
13798:putting this out.
13208:The town is in the
13189:
13183:Rodney, Mississippi
12718:The Washington Post
12433:Indo Canadian Voice
12324:WP:Ignore all rules
12269:marginally reliable
12093:request for comment
11986:Phoronix Test Suite
11213:this academic study
11037:, 16 September 2024
10669:news media source.
10289:Trivia? IPSO noted
10250:, which relates to
9208:Press Freedom Index
8766:any breaches at all
8274:TWICE in four years
7934:The Times of Israel
6722:Firefangledfeathers
6379:explicitly labelled
6313:This helps no-one.
5838:Firefangledfeathers
5806:Firefangledfeathers
5755:Firefangledfeathers
5228:"No; they are not."
3357:deprecate for now.
3131:self-published site
3127:Option 4: Deprecate
2851:The reliability of
14220:IntentionallyDense
14167:IntentionallyDense
14130:IntentionallyDense
14106:Research article:
13589:hill-bagging.co.uk
13188:
12993:are claiming that
12728:Sports Illustrated
12704:is one guideline:
12667:corrections policy
10156:Jake Wallis Simons
9369:Jonathan Freedland
8509:, the same number
7936:, 6 September 2024
7807:God Save the King!
7692:God Save the King!
7656:Bluethricecreamman
7639:Bluethricecreamman
7620:God Save the King!
7602:Des van Jaarsveldt
7575:God Save the King!
7489:requested comments
7193:WP:FOXNEWSPOLITICS
6885:for more context.
6529:for equity reasons
6495:WP:FOXNEWSPOLITICS
6461:You said that you
6415:coordinated attack
5975:The Stanford Daily
5629:WP:FOXNEWSPOLITICS
5485:Bluethricecreamman
5418:Bluethricecreamman
5385:Bluethricecreamman
5209:category of source
5201:depends on context
4812:are not reliable.
3929:Bluethricecreamman
3498:News articles are
3486:Bluethricecreamman
3462:Bluethricecreamman
3403:God Save the King!
2864:Generally reliable
2827:requested comments
2564:requested comments
2505:
2485:
590:
584:
578:
395:Contentious topics
194:Dispute resolution
182:Questions on media
14509:
14494:
14490:
14484:
14331:Hope this helps.
14268:
14253:
14249:
14243:
14212:
14197:
14193:
14187:
14182:consensus forming
14032:Input welcome at
13996:
13981:
13977:
13971:
13892:
13877:
13873:
13867:
13778:
13763:
13759:
13753:
13735:Fowler&fowler
13686:
13671:
13667:
13661:
13394:
13379:
13375:
13369:
13279:
13278:
13210:Mississippi Delta
13144:
13129:
13125:
13119:
12978:Listicle as a RS?
12971:
12931:
12916:
12912:
12906:
12640:
12625:
12621:
12615:
12587:
12572:
12568:
12562:
12366:RS noted above).
12346:
12316:
12228:
12147:
12132:
12128:
12122:
12110:
12078:
12063:
12059:
12053:
12023:
11916:
11810:
11795:
11791:
11785:
11661:
11646:
11642:
11636:
11626:
11557:David Aaronovitch
11347:applies here. If
11309:
11294:
11290:
11284:
11259:
11204:
11189:
11185:
11179:
11150:
11093:
11092:
11084:
10830:
10700:
10659:Nayirah testimony
10649:
10608:
10252:this 2019 article
10187:
10172:
10168:
10162:
10154:editorialship of
9806:just 30 employees
9795:
9681:
9567:
9389:
9295:
9257:
9156:
9012:
8977:Prospect Magazine
8901:
8871:NYT be downgraded
8828:
8782:
8683:
8529:
8445:between 2018-2019
8235:
8155:
8098:
8083:
8079:
8073:
8004:
7903:
7888:
7884:
7878:
7866:
7851:
7847:
7841:
7781:become evident.--
7752:
7737:
7733:
7727:
7519:The South African
7511:
7510:
7484:
7483:
7304:correction policy
7183:
7168:
7164:
7158:
7095:
7080:
7076:
7070:
6816:
6801:
6797:
6791:
6737:
6733:
6593:According to the
6426:, similar to the
6195:
6180:
6176:
6170:
6161:
6146:
6142:
6136:
6113:
6098:
6094:
6088:
5997:education world.
5526:
5511:
5507:
5501:
5286:WP:CONTEXTMATTERS
5282:It always depends
5230:We should prefer
4934:
4919:
4915:
4909:
4899:
4884:
4880:
4874:
4319:"< . . . : -->
4048:definitive answer
3233:
3217:comment added by
3202:
3187:
3183:
3177:
3042:
2849:
2848:
2822:
2821:
2718:
2703:
2699:
2693:
2677:
2662:
2658:
2652:
2648:
2626:Salem Media Group
2586:
2585:
2559:
2558:
2501:
2481:
2436:Additional notes:
586:
580:
576:
561:
560:
390:General sanctions
229:Resource requests
214:Original research
14543:
14497:
14492:
14488:
14482:
14400:
14349:
14310:
14256:
14251:
14247:
14241:
14240:the changes. --
14238:reverted discuss
14200:
14195:
14191:
14185:
14125:
13984:
13979:
13975:
13969:
13880:
13875:
13871:
13865:
13766:
13761:
13757:
13751:
13741:
13736:
13709:Channel New Asia
13674:
13669:
13665:
13659:
13616:
13461:
13427:
13422:
13382:
13377:
13373:
13367:
13285:
13190:
13187:
13132:
13127:
13123:
13117:
13089:
13068:
13061:
13035:
13028:
12958:
12919:
12914:
12910:
12904:
12857:
12751:
12628:
12623:
12619:
12613:
12575:
12570:
12566:
12560:
12441:
12440:
12425:
12399:Pierre Poilievre
12347:
12340:
12314:
12310:
12307:
12300:
12285:
12262:
12245:
12229:
12222:
12183:
12151:
12135:
12130:
12126:
12120:
12115:
12108:
12104:
12101:
12090:
12066:
12061:
12057:
12051:
12040:
12021:
12017:
12014:
12007:
11969:
11914:
11910:
11907:
11896:
11798:
11793:
11789:
11783:
11755:www.phoronix.com
11749:www.phoronix.com
11649:
11644:
11640:
11634:
11621:
11617:
11584:journalism", and
11297:
11292:
11288:
11282:
11254:
11250:
11192:
11187:
11183:
11177:
11145:
11141:
11079:
11075:
10966:
10953:
10952:
10825:
10821:
10734:
10695:
10691:
10644:
10640:
10603:
10599:
10489:
10175:
10170:
10166:
10160:
10037:
9923:
9854:
9790:
9786:
9729:
9676:
9672:
9583:
9562:
9558:
9397:Guardian as well
9384:
9380:
9290:
9286:
9252:
9248:
9186:
9151:
9147:
9041:
9007:
9003:
8979:, 26 April 2024
8896:
8892:
8823:
8819:
8813:
8812:
8811:
8777:
8773:
8758:14 breaches each
8678:
8674:
8656:current scandal.
8524:
8520:
8350:unreliability.--
8230:
8226:
8150:
8146:
8086:
8081:
8077:
8071:
7999:
7995:
7891:
7886:
7882:
7876:
7854:
7849:
7845:
7839:
7818:
7815:
7808:
7805:
7740:
7735:
7731:
7725:
7703:
7700:
7693:
7690:
7683:
7675:
7659:
7631:
7628:
7621:
7618:
7586:
7583:
7576:
7573:
7473:
7472:
7466:
7461:
7460:
7454:
7290:
7283:
7260:
7253:
7171:
7166:
7162:
7156:
7083:
7078:
7074:
7068:
6933:The evidence is
6875:
6804:
6799:
6795:
6789:
6735:
6731:
6652:Once again, the
6597:, the complaint
6561:
6504:
6502:
6424:Christopher Rufo
6419:
6369:, another about
6183:
6178:
6174:
6168:
6149:
6144:
6140:
6134:
6101:
6096:
6092:
6086:
5670:
5664:
5656:
5654:
5652:
5612:
5594:
5514:
5509:
5505:
5499:
5297:
5061:Symphony Regalia
4960:No true Scotsman
4922:
4917:
4913:
4907:
4887:
4882:
4878:
4872:
4676:Symphony Regalia
4452:Horse Eye's Back
4424:Horse Eye's Back
4395:Horse Eye's Back
4087:
4055:
3615:Proper sourcing
3414:
3411:
3404:
3401:
3341:
3336:
3309:
3303:
3212:
3190:
3185:
3181:
3175:
3087:
3082:
2934:
2924:
2919:
2811:
2810:
2804:
2799:
2798:
2792:
2706:
2701:
2697:
2691:
2665:
2660:
2656:
2650:
2646:
2624:' then 'sold to
2548:
2547:
2541:
2536:
2535:
2529:
2523:RFC: twitchy.com
2516:
2514:
2466:
2459:
2452:
621:List of archives
603:
224:Reliable sources
158:User permissions
138:Main Page errors
133:Interface admins
123:Closure requests
53:
46:
39:
30:
29:
14551:
14550:
14546:
14545:
14544:
14542:
14541:
14540:
14516:
14515:
14398:
14345:
14340:The article is
14308:
14286:
14236:and if you get
14107:
14096:Adrenal fatigue
14080:Adrenal fatigue
14076:Adrenal fatigue
14061:
14040:about revising
14030:
13788:
13739:
13734:
13696:
13646:Barnards.tar.gz
13608:
13591:
13459:
13425:
13416:
13283:
13262:Oakland College
13154:
13087:
13064:
13057:
13031:
13024:
12980:
12851:
12745:
12662:
12446:
12445:
12444:
12427:
12426:
12422:
12384:
12331:
12312:
12305:
12294:
12292:The Needle Drop
12290:'s reviews for
12288:Anthony Fantano
12279:
12275:'s articles on
12273:Stephen Barrett
12260:
12241:
12213:
12173:
12118:
12106:
12099:
12088:
12086:
12036:
12019:
12012:
11993:
11982:Michael Larabel
11965:
11912:
11905:
11890:
11751:
11619:
11268:BobFromBrockley
11252:
11143:
11077:
11024:self-published.
10962:
10923:BobFromBrockley
10861:BobFromBrockley
10823:
10778:BobFromBrockley
10730:
10693:
10642:
10601:
10498:BobFromBrockley
10485:
10394:BobFromBrockley
10362:BobFromBrockley
10265:BobFromBrockley
10196:BobFromBrockley
10141:Barnards.tar.gz
10081:BobFromBrockley
10033:
10015:Alanscottwalker
9970:BobFromBrockley
9919:
9850:
9832:Alanscottwalker
9788:
9771:Times of Israel
9725:
9674:
9649:BobFromBrockley
9579:
9560:
9382:
9288:
9250:
9182:
9170:
9149:
9123:
9062:
9039:
9005:
8969:Alan Rusbridger
8894:
8888:influence op.â
8821:
8809:
8794:BobFromBrockley
8775:
8691:Bobfrombrockley
8676:
8614:Bobfrombrockley
8600:BobFromBrockley
8541:BobFromBrockley
8522:
8259:Alanscottwalker
8228:
8164:More coverage:
8148:
7997:
7915:
7828:
7813:
7806:
7803:
7800:
7717:
7698:
7691:
7688:
7685:
7677:
7669:
7653:
7626:
7619:
7616:
7613:
7610:WP:ROYALCENTRAL
7581:
7574:
7571:
7568:
7485:
7470:
7458:
7450:
7430:BobFromBrockley
7375:BobFromBrockley
7340:Barnards.tar.gz
7286:
7279:
7256:
7249:
7221:
6873:
6860:
6714:
6557:
6500:
6498:
6417:
6381:as political? â
6055:That's not how
5673:
5665:
5661:
5650:
5648:
5585:
5569:
5567:
5345:
5309:Alanscottwalker
5293:
5149:
5076:
4999:
4980:
4085:
4053:
3424:
3409:
3402:
3399:
3396:
3339:
3334:
3305:
3297:
3129:That blog is a
3098:
3085:
3080:
3049:
2990:âą Discussions:
2922:
2917:
2823:
2808:
2796:
2788:
2622:Michelle Malkin
2560:
2545:
2533:
2525:
2518:
2517:
2512:
2510:
2470:
2469:
2462:
2455:
2448:
2444:
2433:
2432:
2431:
2430:
2429:
2428:
622:
604:
598:
572:
562:
557:
546:
463:False positives
421:
353:
270:
219:Pending changes
204:Fringe theories
162:
92:Administrators
81:
62:
57:
27:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
14549:
14539:
14538:
14533:
14528:
14514:
14513:
14478:
14477:
14476:
14475:
14474:
14473:
14472:
14425:
14351:
14338:
14329:
14321:
14285:
14282:
14281:
14280:
14279:
14278:
14277:
14276:
14275:
14274:
14273:
14272:
14060:
14057:
14042:WP:RSPCRITERIA
14029:
14026:
14025:
14024:
14023:
14022:
14021:
14020:
14019:
14018:
14017:
14016:
14015:
14014:
13922:
13916:
13906:
13787:
13784:
13783:
13782:
13723:
13722:
13695:
13692:
13691:
13690:
13656:
13590:
13587:
13586:
13585:
13569:
13568:
13567:
13566:
13565:
13564:
13563:
13562:
13561:
13560:
13559:
13558:
13557:
13556:
13555:
13554:
13399:
13398:
13366:publisher. --
13363:
13349:
13335:
13316:
13315:
13277:
13276:
13273:
13269:
13268:
13265:
13257:
13256:
13253:
13245:
13244:
13241:
13233:
13232:
13229:
13225:
13224:
13221:
13217:
13216:
13213:
13205:
13204:
13196:
13153:
13150:
13149:
13148:
13114:
13099:
13078:
13077:
13076:
13075:
13074:
13073:
12987:Di (they-them)
12979:
12976:
12975:
12974:
12973:
12972:
12940:
12939:
12938:
12937:
12936:
12935:
12897:
12873:
12872:
12871:
12816:
12793:
12765:WP:BESTSOURCES
12762:
12753:WP:USEBYOTHERS
12702:WP:USEBYOTHERS
12661:
12660:Fadeaway World
12658:
12657:
12656:
12655:
12654:
12653:
12652:
12651:
12650:
12649:
12648:
12647:
12646:
12645:
12644:
12480:
12476:
12471:
12470:
12443:
12442:
12419:
12418:
12414:
12383:
12380:
12379:
12378:
12364:wp:usebyothers
12359:
12355:
12354:
12353:
12352:
12351:
12328:
12249:
12206:
12170:
12169:
12154:
12153:
12152:
12084:
12083:
12082:
12044:
11977:Self-published
11973:
11947:
11946:
11945:
11944:
11929:
11928:
11927:
11926:
11925:
11924:
11923:
11922:
11921:
11833:
11750:
11747:
11746:
11745:
11744:
11743:
11698:
11697:
11694:
11691:
11688:
11685:
11682:
11679:
11668:
11667:
11666:
11665:
11630:
11611:
11610:
11609:
11606:
11602:
11599:
11593:
11592:
11591:
11585:
11578:
11569:
11568:
11567:
11554:
11551:Jerusalem Post
11542:
11535:
11529:
11510:Guardian today
11484:
11483:
11482:
11481:
11480:
11479:
11478:
11477:
11413:
11384:
11383:
11382:
11381:
11380:
11379:
11378:
11377:
11376:
11375:
11353:WP:EXCEPTIONAL
11323:
11319:
11315:
11314:
11313:
11263:
11244:
11241:
11227:
11174:
11173:
11172:
11171:
11170:
11167:
11161:
11135:
11128:Tortoise Media
11091:
11090:
11089:
11088:
11059:
11058:
11057:
11044:
11038:
11028:
11027:
11026:
11020:
11004:
11003:
11002:
10992:
10979:Hadley Freeman
10968:
10967:
10958:
10957:
10951:
10950:
10949:
10948:
10914:
10913:
10912:
10911:
10910:
10909:
10908:
10907:
10906:
10905:
10904:
10889:
10885:
10875:
10871:
10856:
10810:
10809:
10808:
10807:
10806:
10805:
10804:
10803:
10802:
10708:
10666:
10655:
10654:
10653:
10575:
10574:
10573:
10572:
10558:
10557:
10556:
10536:
10535:
10515:
10514:
10513:
10512:
10511:
10510:
10509:
10508:
10493:
10454:
10421:
10417:
10414:
10410:
10409:
10408:
10407:
10406:
10405:
10404:
10374:
10373:
10372:
10354:
10351:
10350:
10349:
10280:
10279:
10278:
10277:
10276:
10275:
10261:
10255:
10230:
10227:
10224:
10221:
10218:
10215:
10212:
10209:
10191:
10151:
10136:
10135:
10134:
10093:
10092:
10091:
10063:
10062:
10061:
10060:
10059:
10009:
10008:
10007:
10006:
10005:
10004:
10003:
10002:
10001:
10000:
9999:
9998:
9997:
9996:
9982:
9981:
9980:
9938:
9937:
9936:
9935:
9934:
9933:
9932:
9931:
9930:
9929:
9928:
9927:
9896:
9895:
9894:
9879:
9842:
9802:
9776:
9775:
9774:
9768:
9762:
9753:
9745:
9716:
9715:
9714:
9713:
9712:
9711:
9710:
9709:
9708:
9707:
9706:
9705:
9704:
9664:. Also note â
9627:
9594:
9591:Brian Cathcart
9571:
9552:
9551:
9550:
9536:
9522:
9521:
9520:
9519:
9518:
9457:
9434:
9411:
9410:
9374:
9373:
9372:
9371:
9367:journalistic.â
9358:
9352:
9344:Resignations:
9342:
9341:
9340:
9339:
9338:
9337:
9336:
9335:
9334:
9333:
9332:
9331:
9330:
9329:
9328:
9327:
9312:
9311:
9310:
9309:
9308:
9278:
9232:Colin Shindler
9220:
9214:
9204:
9166:
9141:
9119:
9109:
9108:
9107:
9058:
9048:
9047:
9026:Claas Relotius
9021:
9020:
9019:
9018:
9017:
9016:
8991:
8990:
8989:
8988:
8987:
8963:
8938:
8937:
8936:
8935:
8921:
8920:
8919:
8865:
8864:
8863:
8862:
8861:
8860:
8859:
8858:
8857:
8856:
8855:
8854:
8853:
8852:
8851:
8850:
8849:
8848:
8847:
8846:
8790:
8761:
8750:
8749:
8748:
8745:
8742:
8739:
8736:
8733:
8730:
8727:
8724:
8718:
8717:
8716:
8713:
8710:
8707:
8704:
8669:
8668:
8667:
8657:
8653:
8652:
8651:
8647:The Times had
8645:
8636:
8631:TFD explained
8629:
8628:
8627:
8624:
8596:
8593:
8586:
8582:
8568:
8567:
8566:
8537:
8514:
8503:
8502:
8501:
8500:
8499:
8498:
8497:
8496:
8495:
8494:
8493:
8449:Brian Cathcart
8427:
8392:
8389:
8386:
8383:
8380:
8362:
8294:
8289:
8288:
8220:
8219:
8215:
8211:
8203:
8202:
8196:
8190:
8184:
8178:
8172:
8162:
8161:
8160:
8159:
8136:
8132:
8127:
8121:
8115:
8102:
8068:
8045:
8044:
8043:
7981:
7980:
7969:
7959:
7953:
7947:
7937:
7914:
7911:
7910:
7909:
7908:
7907:
7827:
7824:
7823:
7822:
7793:
7775:
7756:
7716:
7713:
7712:
7711:
7710:
7709:
7708:
7707:
7662:Pravin Gordhan
7650:
7649:
7591:
7590:
7549:
7539:
7533:
7509:
7508:
7502:
7501:
7487:An editor has
7482:
7481:
7474:
7464:
7462:
7449:
7446:
7445:
7444:
7443:
7442:
7441:
7440:
7426:
7406:Please review
7370:
7369:
7368:
7336:
7330:
7324:
7323:
7322:
7265:
7243:The New Yorker
7220:
7217:
7216:
7215:
7188:
7187:
7152:
7151:
7150:
7149:
7148:
7118:
7117:
7116:
7115:
7114:
7099:
7055:TheMissingMuse
7022:TheMissingMuse
7009:
7008:
7007:
7006:
7005:
7004:
7003:
7002:
7001:
6978:
6859:unreliable for
6858:
6836:
6835:
6834:
6824:TheMissingMuse
6767:TheMissingMuse
6713:
6712:Shifting Focus
6710:
6709:
6708:
6689:
6688:
6687:
6686:
6685:
6684:
6683:
6682:
6664:The New Yorker
6640:TheMissingMuse
6622:
6621:
6620:
6619:
6618:
6617:
6616:
6581:TheMissingMuse
6544:
6513:TheMissingMuse
6501:Rhododendrites
6491:
6490:
6489:
6488:
6487:
6486:
6485:
6484:
6483:
6482:
6481:
6480:
6479:
6478:
6477:
6449:TheMissingMuse
6428:antiâCRT panic
6420:behind it all.
6411:focused on DEI
6393:
6349:TheMissingMuse
6328:culture wars.
6293:
6292:
6291:
6290:
6289:
6288:
6287:
6286:
6285:
6275:TheMissingMuse
6239:TheMissingMuse
6217:
6216:
6215:
6214:
6213:
6203:TheMissingMuse
6121:TheMissingMuse
6082:
6075:
6074:
6073:
6072:
6071:
6061:TheMissingMuse
6059:weight works.
6035:
6034:
6033:
6032:
6031:
6030:
6029:
6028:
6027:
6026:
6025:
6024:
6023:
5999:TheMissingMuse
5960:TheMissingMuse
5931:TheMissingMuse
5914:TheMissingMuse
5907:
5906:
5905:
5858:
5857:
5856:
5855:
5854:
5853:
5852:
5784:
5774:TheMissingMuse
5738:
5724:
5723:
5722:
5712:TheMissingMuse
5677:TheMissingMuse
5672:
5671:
5658:
5566:
5563:
5562:
5561:
5546:
5545:
5535:Tinynanorobots
5530:
5495:
5477:
5476:
5475:
5461:
5453:
5449:
5448:
5447:
5446:
5445:
5444:
5443:
5433:Tinynanorobots
5413:
5344:
5341:
5232:WP:SCHOLARSHIP
5222:WP:BESTSOURCES
5184:
5183:
5148:
5145:
5144:
5143:
5124:
5087:
5075:
5072:
5055:
5054:
5049:
5046:
5043:
5040:
4998:
4995:
4979:
4976:
4975:
4974:
4940:
4939:
4938:
4856:
4855:
4854:
4853:
4852:
4851:
4830:
4829:
4828:
4802:
4801:
4800:
4739:
4694:
4687:
4639:
4638:
4637:
4636:
4635:
4634:
4633:
4632:
4631:
4630:
4629:
4628:
4610:
4600:Tinynanorobots
4569:
4537:
4534:
4527:
4526:
4525:
4524:
4523:
4522:
4521:
4520:
4519:
4518:
4517:
4516:
4515:
4514:
4513:
4512:
4511:
4501:Tinynanorobots
4467:Tinynanorobots
4409:Tinynanorobots
4379:
4378:
4377:
4376:
4375:
4374:
4373:
4372:
4371:
4370:
4369:
4368:
4367:
4366:
4365:
4364:
4351:
4348:
4333:Tinynanorobots
4325:
4312:
4305:Tinynanorobots
4301:
4293:
4292:
4291:
4290:
4289:
4288:
4287:
4277:Tinynanorobots
4242:Tinynanorobots
4237:
4220:Jesuit sources
4206:Tinynanorobots
4202:Jesuit sources
4198:
4167:
4166:
4165:
4164:
4163:
4162:
4161:
4160:
4159:
4158:
4157:
4156:
4155:
4154:
4153:
4143:Tinynanorobots
4139:
4114:
4100:Tinynanorobots
4097:
4093:
4044:
4025:in addition to
4010:Tinynanorobots
3973:Tinynanorobots
3944:Tinynanorobots
3905:
3904:
3894:100.36.106.199
3889:
3888:
3887:
3886:
3885:
3884:
3858:
3852:
3851:
3850:
3849:
3848:
3846:
3845:
3844:
3824:
3823:
3791:
3789:
3782:
3770:
3767:
3756:Tinynanorobots
3752:
3751:
3749:
3739:
3738:
3737:
3719:
3718:
3717:
3690:
3689:
3688:
3679:
3677:
3676:
3675:
3674:
3673:
3672:
3671:
3661:Tinynanorobots
3656:
3655:
3654:
3554:
3553:
3552:
3542:Tinynanorobots
3537:
3533:
3530:
3527:
3512:
3508:
3496:
3478:
3458:
3455:
3438:Tinynanorobots
3423:
3420:
3419:
3418:
3389:
3388:
3370:
3369:
3350:
3349:
3348:
3347:
3300:LaundryPizza03
3291:
3273:
3272:
3253:
3252:
3234:
3206:
3145:
3135:Shadowwarrior8
3124:
3097:
3094:
3052:Universe Guide
3048:
3045:
3044:
3043:
2901:
2900:
2891:
2883:
2875:
2867:
2854:Universe Guide
2847:
2846:
2840:
2839:
2825:An editor has
2820:
2819:
2812:
2802:
2800:
2787:
2785:Universe Guide
2781:
2780:
2779:
2761:
2747:
2746:
2745:
2683:
2682:
2681:
2629:
2584:
2583:
2577:
2576:
2562:An editor has
2557:
2556:
2549:
2539:
2537:
2524:
2521:
2509:
2508:
2507:
2498:
2491:
2468:
2467:
2460:
2453:
2445:
2440:
2420:
2380:
2340:
2300:
2260:
2220:
2180:
2140:
2100:
2060:
2020:
1980:
1940:
1900:
1860:
1820:
1780:
1740:
1700:
1660:
1620:
1580:
1540:
1500:
1460:
1420:
1380:
1340:
1300:
1260:
1220:
1180:
1140:
1100:
1060:
1020:
980:
940:
900:
860:
820:
780:
740:
700:
660:
623:
620:
619:
605:
600:
596:
594:
593:
577:Before posting
574:
573:
566:
565:
564:
559:
558:
551:
548:
547:
545:
544:
539:
534:
533:
532:
527:
522:
517:
512:
507:
497:
492:
491:
490:
485:
483:Reference desk
480:
475:
467:
466:
465:
460:
450:
449:
448:
443:
438:
429:
427:
423:
422:
420:
419:
414:
404:
399:
398:
397:
392:
387:
377:
372:
367:
361:
359:
355:
354:
352:
351:
346:
345:
344:
339:
334:
329:
324:
319:
309:
304:
299:
294:
289:
284:
282:History merges
278:
276:
272:
271:
269:
268:
263:
261:Titleblacklist
258:
253:
252:
251:
246:
236:
231:
226:
221:
216:
211:
206:
201:
199:External links
196:
191:
190:
189:
184:
176:
170:
168:
164:
163:
161:
160:
155:
150:
145:
140:
135:
130:
125:
120:
115:
110:
105:
104:
103:
98:
89:
87:
83:
82:
67:
64:
63:
56:
55:
48:
41:
33:
25:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
14548:
14537:
14534:
14532:
14529:
14527:
14524:
14523:
14521:
14512:
14508:
14506:
14502:
14496:
14495:
14479:
14471:
14467:
14463:
14459:
14455:
14451:
14447:
14443:
14439:
14438:
14437:
14434:
14433:Rotary Engine
14430:
14426:
14423:
14419:
14415:
14411:
14407:
14406:
14405:
14402:
14401:
14394:
14389:
14385:
14380:
14375:
14371:
14370:
14369:
14365:
14361:
14357:
14352:
14348:
14343:
14339:
14337:
14334:
14333:Rotary Engine
14330:
14327:
14322:
14318:
14317:
14316:
14315:
14312:
14311:
14304:
14300:
14297:
14294:
14289:
14271:
14267:
14265:
14261:
14255:
14254:
14239:
14235:
14231:
14230:
14229:
14225:
14221:
14217:
14216:
14215:
14211:
14209:
14205:
14199:
14198:
14183:
14178:
14177:
14176:
14172:
14168:
14164:
14163:
14162:
14158:
14154:
14150:
14146:
14145:claimed to be
14142:
14141:
14140:
14139:
14135:
14131:
14126:
14123:
14119:
14115:
14111:
14104:
14103:
14098:
14097:
14092:
14088:
14084:
14081:
14077:
14072:
14070:
14066:
14056:
14055:
14051:
14047:
14043:
14039:
14035:
14013:
14009:
14005:
14001:
14000:
13999:
13995:
13993:
13989:
13983:
13982:
13967:
13963:
13962:WP:BLPPRIMARY
13959:
13955:
13954:
13953:
13949:
13945:
13940:
13939:
13938:
13934:
13930:
13926:
13923:
13920:
13917:
13914:
13910:
13907:
13905:
13901:
13897:
13896:
13895:
13891:
13889:
13885:
13879:
13878:
13863:
13862:
13861:
13857:
13853:
13849:
13846:
13845:
13844:
13843:
13839:
13835:
13831:
13829:
13824:
13823:
13819:
13816:
13812:
13808:
13805:
13804:
13799:
13797:
13793:
13781:
13777:
13775:
13771:
13765:
13764:
13748:
13747:
13746:
13745:
13742:
13737:
13732:
13728:
13721:
13718:
13717:
13716:
13713:
13712:
13710:
13706:
13701:
13689:
13685:
13683:
13679:
13673:
13672:
13657:
13655:
13651:
13647:
13643:
13639:
13636:
13632:
13628:
13625:
13622:
13621:
13620:
13619:
13615:
13614:
13613:
13605:
13601:
13597:
13584:
13580:
13576:
13571:
13570:
13553:
13549:
13545:
13540:
13536:
13535:
13534:
13530:
13526:
13522:
13521:
13520:
13516:
13512:
13508:
13507:Poverty Point
13504:
13500:
13499:
13498:
13494:
13490:
13486:
13485:
13484:
13480:
13476:
13472:
13471:
13470:
13466:
13462:
13456:
13452:
13451:
13450:
13446:
13442:
13438:
13437:
13436:
13432:
13428:
13420:
13415:
13414:
13413:
13412:
13408:
13404:
13397:
13393:
13391:
13387:
13381:
13380:
13364:
13362:
13358:
13354:
13350:
13348:
13344:
13340:
13336:
13334:
13330:
13326:
13321:
13320:
13319:
13314:
13310:
13306:
13302:
13297:
13296:
13295:
13294:
13290:
13286:
13274:
13271:
13270:
13266:
13263:
13259:
13258:
13254:
13251:
13247:
13246:
13242:
13239:
13235:
13234:
13230:
13227:
13226:
13222:
13219:
13218:
13214:
13211:
13207:
13206:
13203:
13202:
13197:
13195:
13192:
13191:
13186:
13184:
13180:
13176:
13172:
13170:
13168:
13166:
13163:
13159:
13147:
13143:
13141:
13137:
13131:
13130:
13115:
13113:
13109:
13105:
13100:
13098:
13094:
13090:
13083:
13080:
13079:
13072:
13069:
13067:
13062:
13060:
13053:
13052:
13051:
13048:
13045:
13041:
13040:
13039:
13036:
13034:
13029:
13027:
13021:
13017:
13013:
13009:
13008:
13007:
13006:
13003:
13000:
12996:
12992:
12988:
12985:
12970:
12966:
12962:
12957:
12956:
12955:
12951:
12947:
12942:
12941:
12934:
12930:
12928:
12924:
12918:
12917:
12902:
12898:
12896:
12892:
12888:
12883:
12878:
12874:
12870:
12866:
12862:
12855:
12850:
12849:
12848:
12844:
12840:
12836:
12831:
12830:
12829:
12825:
12821:
12817:
12814:
12812:
12808:
12807:fact-checking
12801:
12797:
12794:
12791:
12789:
12785:
12784:fact-checking
12778:
12774:
12770:
12766:
12763:
12759:
12754:
12749:
12744:
12743:
12742:
12738:
12734:
12730:
12729:
12724:
12720:
12719:
12714:
12708:
12703:
12699:
12698:
12697:
12696:
12692:
12688:
12684:
12680:
12679:ethics policy
12676:
12672:
12668:
12643:
12639:
12637:
12633:
12627:
12626:
12610:
12609:
12608:
12604:
12600:
12596:
12592:
12591:
12590:
12586:
12584:
12580:
12574:
12573:
12558:
12554:
12550:
12546:
12545:
12544:
12540:
12536:
12531:
12530:
12529:
12525:
12521:
12517:
12513:
12510:
12509:
12508:
12504:
12500:
12496:
12495:
12494:
12490:
12486:
12481:
12477:
12473:
12472:
12469:
12465:
12464:contributions
12461:
12457:
12453:
12448:
12447:
12439:
12434:
12430:
12424:
12420:
12417:
12413:
12412:
12408:
12404:
12400:
12396:
12391:
12389:
12377:
12373:
12369:
12365:
12360:
12356:
12350:
12344:
12338:
12334:
12329:
12325:
12322:
12321:
12320:
12317:
12315:
12309:
12308:
12298:
12293:
12289:
12283:
12278:
12274:
12270:
12266:
12258:
12254:
12250:
12248:
12244:
12240:
12239:
12234:
12233:
12232:
12226:
12220:
12216:
12211:
12207:
12203:
12199:
12195:
12193:
12189:
12187:
12181:
12177:
12172:
12171:
12168:
12164:
12160:
12155:
12150:
12146:
12144:
12140:
12134:
12133:
12117:
12116:
12114:
12111:
12109:
12103:
12102:
12094:
12087:I've removed
12085:
12081:
12077:
12075:
12071:
12065:
12064:
12049:
12045:
12043:
12039:
12035:
12034:
12029:
12028:
12027:
12024:
12022:
12016:
12015:
12005:
12001:
11998:, whose work
11997:
11991:
11987:
11983:
11979:
11978:
11974:
11972:
11968:
11964:
11963:
11957:
11953:
11949:
11948:
11943:
11939:
11935:
11930:
11920:
11917:
11915:
11909:
11908:
11900:
11894:
11889:
11888:
11883:
11879:
11878:
11877:
11873:
11869:
11865:
11864:
11863:
11859:
11855:
11852:
11849:
11848:
11847:
11843:
11839:
11834:
11830:
11829:
11828:
11824:
11820:
11815:
11814:
11813:
11809:
11807:
11803:
11797:
11796:
11781:
11780:
11779:
11778:
11774:
11770:
11767:
11763:
11762:
11758:
11756:
11742:
11738:
11734:
11730:
11729:
11728:
11724:
11720:
11715:
11714:
11713:
11712:
11708:
11704:
11695:
11692:
11689:
11686:
11683:
11680:
11677:
11676:
11675:
11673:
11664:
11660:
11658:
11654:
11648:
11647:
11631:
11629:
11625:
11622:
11616:
11612:
11607:
11603:
11600:
11597:
11596:
11594:
11589:
11586:
11582:
11579:
11576:
11575:The Telegraph
11573:
11572:
11570:
11566:
11562:
11558:
11555:
11552:
11548:
11543:
11540:
11536:
11533:
11532:
11530:
11528:
11524:
11520:
11516:
11511:
11508:
11507:
11506:
11502:
11498:
11494:
11490:
11486:
11485:
11476:
11472:
11468:
11464:
11463:
11462:
11458:
11454:
11450:
11447:
11446:
11445:
11441:
11437:
11432:
11431:
11430:
11426:
11422:
11418:
11414:
11412:
11408:
11404:
11400:
11399:
11398:
11397:
11393:
11389:
11374:
11370:
11366:
11362:
11358:
11354:
11350:
11346:
11342:
11338:
11337:
11336:
11332:
11328:
11324:
11320:
11316:
11312:
11308:
11306:
11302:
11296:
11295:
11279:
11278:
11277:
11273:
11269:
11264:
11262:
11258:
11255:
11249:
11245:
11242:
11240:
11236:
11232:
11228:
11226:
11222:
11218:
11214:
11209:
11208:
11207:
11203:
11201:
11197:
11191:
11190:
11175:
11168:
11165:
11164:
11162:
11159:
11158:
11155:
11154:
11153:
11149:
11146:
11140:
11136:
11133:
11129:
11126:
11125:
11124:
11120:
11116:
11112:
11111:
11110:
11109:
11105:
11101:
11097:
11087:
11083:
11080:
11074:
11070:
11066:
11064:
11060:
11056:
11051:
11050:
11048:
11045:
11042:
11039:
11036:
11035:Press Gazette
11032:
11029:
11025:
11021:
11019:
11015:
11014:
11012:
11008:
11005:
11001:
10998:
10993:
10991:
10987:
10986:
10984:
10980:
10976:
10972:
10971:
10970:
10969:
10965:
10960:
10959:
10955:
10954:
10947:
10943:
10939:
10934:
10933:
10932:
10928:
10924:
10919:
10915:
10903:
10899:
10895:
10890:
10886:
10883:
10880:
10877:According to
10876:
10872:
10870:
10866:
10862:
10857:
10855:
10851:
10847:
10842:
10839:
10835:
10834:
10833:
10829:
10826:
10820:
10815:
10811:
10801:
10797:
10793:
10789:
10788:
10787:
10783:
10779:
10775:
10770:
10769:
10768:
10764:
10760:
10756:
10753:
10752:
10751:
10747:
10743:
10739:
10738:
10737:
10733:
10729:
10728:
10723:
10722:
10721:
10717:
10713:
10709:
10705:
10704:
10703:
10699:
10696:
10690:
10686:
10682:
10681:
10680:
10676:
10672:
10667:
10664:
10663:Judith Miller
10660:
10656:
10652:
10648:
10645:
10639:
10635:
10631:
10627:
10626:
10625:
10621:
10617:
10613:
10612:
10611:
10607:
10604:
10598:
10595:
10591:
10590:
10589:
10588:
10584:
10580:
10571:
10567:
10563:
10559:
10555:
10551:
10547:
10542:
10541:
10540:
10539:
10538:
10537:
10534:
10530:
10526:
10521:
10517:
10516:
10507:
10503:
10499:
10494:
10492:
10488:
10484:
10483:
10479:
10475:
10470:
10469:
10468:
10464:
10460:
10455:
10453:
10449:
10445:
10441:
10437:
10436:
10435:
10431:
10427:
10422:
10418:
10415:
10411:
10403:
10399:
10395:
10390:
10389:
10388:
10384:
10380:
10375:
10371:
10367:
10363:
10358:
10355:
10352:
10348:
10344:
10340:
10336:
10333:
10332:
10331:
10327:
10323:
10319:
10315:
10314:
10313:
10309:
10305:
10301:
10296:
10292:
10288:
10287:
10286:
10285:
10284:
10283:
10282:
10281:
10274:
10270:
10266:
10262:
10259:
10256:
10253:
10249:
10245:
10244:
10243:
10239:
10235:
10231:
10228:
10225:
10222:
10219:
10216:
10213:
10210:
10207:
10206:
10205:
10201:
10197:
10192:
10190:
10186:
10184:
10180:
10174:
10173:
10157:
10152:
10150:
10146:
10142:
10137:
10133:
10129:
10125:
10120:
10119:
10118:
10114:
10110:
10106:
10102:
10098:
10094:
10090:
10086:
10082:
10078:
10077:
10076:
10072:
10068:
10064:
10058:
10054:
10050:
10046:
10042:
10041:
10040:
10036:
10032:
10031:
10026:
10025:
10024:
10020:
10016:
10011:
10010:
9995:
9991:
9987:
9983:
9979:
9975:
9971:
9966:
9965:
9964:
9960:
9956:
9952:
9951:
9950:
9949:
9948:
9947:
9946:
9945:
9944:
9943:
9942:
9941:
9940:
9939:
9926:
9922:
9918:
9917:
9912:
9911:
9910:
9906:
9902:
9897:
9893:
9889:
9885:
9880:
9877:
9876:
9875:
9871:
9867:
9863:
9859:
9858:
9857:
9853:
9849:
9848:
9843:
9841:
9837:
9833:
9829:
9828:
9827:
9823:
9819:
9815:
9811:
9808:, a total of
9807:
9803:
9800:
9799:
9798:
9794:
9791:
9785:
9781:
9777:
9772:
9769:
9766:
9763:
9760:
9757:
9756:
9754:
9751:
9746:
9742:
9738:
9734:
9733:
9732:
9728:
9724:
9723:
9717:
9703:
9699:
9695:
9691:
9686:
9685:
9684:
9680:
9677:
9671:
9668:
9663:
9660:
9659:
9658:
9654:
9650:
9646:
9641:
9640:The Telegraph
9636:
9632:
9628:
9626:
9622:
9618:
9613:
9609:
9608:
9607:
9603:
9599:
9595:
9592:
9588:
9587:
9586:
9582:
9578:
9577:
9572:
9570:
9566:
9563:
9557:
9553:
9549:
9547:
9541:
9537:
9535:
9530:
9526:
9525:
9523:
9517:
9513:
9509:
9505:
9501:
9500:
9499:
9495:
9491:
9487:
9486:
9485:
9481:
9477:
9473:
9472:
9471:
9467:
9463:
9458:
9455:
9450:
9449:
9448:
9444:
9440:
9435:
9433:
9429:
9425:
9421:
9417:
9413:
9412:
9409:
9405:
9401:
9398:
9395:
9394:
9393:
9392:
9388:
9385:
9379:
9370:
9365:
9364:
9362:
9359:
9356:
9353:
9350:
9347:
9346:
9345:
9326:
9322:
9318:
9313:
9307:
9304:
9300:
9299:
9298:
9294:
9291:
9285:
9282:
9279:
9276:
9272:
9271:
9270:
9267:
9262:
9261:
9260:
9256:
9253:
9247:
9243:
9240:
9237:
9233:
9229:
9225:
9221:
9218:
9215:
9213:
9209:
9205:
9203:
9199:
9195:
9191:
9190:
9189:
9185:
9181:
9180:
9175:
9174:
9173:
9169:
9165:
9161:
9160:
9159:
9155:
9152:
9146:
9142:
9140:
9136:
9132:
9128:
9127:
9126:
9122:
9118:
9114:
9110:
9106:
9102:
9098:
9095:association.
9093:
9092:
9091:
9087:
9083:
9079:
9076:
9075:
9074:
9071:
9067:
9066:
9065:
9061:
9057:
9053:
9050:
9049:
9046:
9043:
9042:
9035:
9031:
9027:
9023:
9022:
9015:
9011:
9008:
9002:
8998:
8995:
8994:
8992:
8986:
8981:
8980:
8978:
8974:
8970:
8967:
8966:
8964:
8962:
8959:
8955:
8954:
8953:
8949:
8945:
8940:
8939:
8934:
8930:
8926:
8922:
8918:
8914:
8910:
8906:
8905:
8904:
8900:
8897:
8891:
8886:
8885:
8884:
8880:
8876:
8872:
8867:
8866:
8845:
8841:
8837:
8833:
8832:
8831:
8827:
8824:
8818:
8805:
8804:
8803:
8799:
8795:
8791:
8787:
8786:
8785:
8781:
8778:
8772:
8768:
8767:
8762:
8759:
8755:
8751:
8746:
8743:
8740:
8737:
8734:
8731:
8728:
8725:
8722:
8721:
8719:
8714:
8711:
8708:
8705:
8702:
8701:
8699:
8696:
8692:
8688:
8687:
8686:
8682:
8679:
8673:
8670:
8665:
8661:
8660:
8658:
8654:
8650:
8646:
8644:
8640:
8639:
8637:
8634:
8630:
8625:
8622:
8621:
8619:
8615:
8611:
8610:
8609:
8605:
8601:
8597:
8594:
8591:
8587:
8583:
8581:
8577:
8573:
8569:
8565:
8561:
8557:
8552:
8551:
8550:
8546:
8542:
8538:
8534:
8533:
8532:
8528:
8525:
8519:
8515:
8512:
8508:
8504:
8492:
8491:
8487:
8483:
8479:
8478:
8475:
8471:
8467:
8463:
8462:2020-mid-2021
8459:
8455:
8450:
8446:
8442:
8441:
8440:
8436:
8432:
8428:
8424:
8421:
8420:
8419:
8415:
8411:
8407:
8406:
8405:
8401:
8397:
8393:
8390:
8387:
8384:
8381:
8378:
8377:
8376:
8372:
8368:
8365:astounding.--
8363:
8361:
8357:
8353:
8348:
8344:
8343:
8342:
8341:
8340:
8336:
8332:
8328:
8325:
8324:
8323:
8319:
8315:
8310:
8309:
8308:
8304:
8300:
8295:
8291:
8290:
8287:
8283:
8279:
8275:
8271:
8270:
8269:
8268:
8264:
8260:
8254:
8253:
8249:
8245:
8239:
8238:
8234:
8231:
8225:
8216:
8212:
8208:
8207:
8206:
8200:
8197:
8194:
8191:
8188:
8185:
8182:
8179:
8176:
8173:
8170:
8167:
8166:
8165:
8158:
8154:
8151:
8145:
8141:
8137:
8133:
8131:
8128:
8126:
8122:
8120:
8116:
8113:
8112:
8111:
8108:
8103:
8101:
8097:
8095:
8091:
8085:
8084:
8069:
8067:
8063:
8059:
8055:
8050:
8046:
8042:
8038:
8034:
8029:
8028:
8027:
8023:
8022:contributions
8019:
8015:
8010:
8009:
8008:
8007:
8003:
8000:
7994:
7990:
7985:
7979:, 11 Sep 2024
7978:
7977:+972 Magazine
7974:
7970:
7968:, 10 Sep 2024
7967:
7963:
7960:
7957:
7954:
7951:
7948:
7945:
7941:
7938:
7935:
7931:
7928:
7927:
7926:
7924:
7920:
7906:
7902:
7900:
7896:
7890:
7889:
7874:
7871:
7870:
7869:
7865:
7863:
7859:
7853:
7852:
7837:
7834:
7830:
7829:
7821:
7816:
7810:
7809:
7797:
7794:
7792:
7788:
7784:
7779:
7776:
7774:
7770:
7766:
7765:
7760:
7757:
7755:
7751:
7749:
7745:
7739:
7738:
7722:
7719:
7718:
7706:
7701:
7695:
7694:
7681:
7673:
7667:
7663:
7657:
7652:
7651:
7648:
7644:
7640:
7636:
7635:
7634:
7629:
7623:
7622:
7611:
7607:
7603:
7599:
7595:
7594:
7593:
7592:
7589:
7584:
7578:
7577:
7567:
7566:
7561:
7557:
7553:
7550:
7547:
7543:
7540:
7537:
7534:
7531:
7527:
7524:
7523:
7522:
7520:
7516:
7506:
7500:
7499:
7495:
7494:
7492:
7490:
7479:
7475:
7468:
7467:
7463:
7456:
7455:
7452:
7439:
7435:
7431:
7427:
7425:
7421:
7420:contributions
7417:
7413:
7409:
7405:
7404:
7403:
7399:
7395:
7390:
7386:
7385:
7384:
7380:
7376:
7371:
7367:
7363:
7362:contributions
7359:
7355:
7351:
7350:
7349:
7345:
7341:
7337:
7334:
7331:
7328:
7325:
7321:
7317:
7316:contributions
7313:
7309:
7305:
7301:
7296:
7295:
7294:
7291:
7289:
7284:
7282:
7277:
7274:
7270:
7266:
7264:
7261:
7259:
7254:
7252:
7247:
7244:
7239:
7238:
7237:
7236:
7232:
7228:
7225:
7214:
7211:
7210:
7209:
7206:
7203:
7200:
7194:
7190:
7189:
7186:
7182:
7180:
7176:
7170:
7169:
7153:
7147:
7143:
7139:
7135:
7131:
7127:
7123:
7119:
7113:
7109:
7105:
7100:
7098:
7094:
7092:
7088:
7082:
7081:
7066:
7065:
7064:
7060:
7056:
7051:
7050:
7049:
7045:
7044:contributions
7041:
7037:
7033:
7032:
7031:
7027:
7023:
7019:
7015:
7010:
7000:
6996:
6992:
6988:
6984:
6979:
6976:
6972:
6968:
6964:
6960:
6959:
6958:
6954:
6950:
6946:
6942:
6941:
6936:
6932:
6931:
6930:
6926:
6922:
6917:
6916:
6915:
6911:
6910:contributions
6907:
6903:
6898:
6897:
6896:
6892:
6888:
6884:
6881:
6877:
6876:
6872:
6868:
6864:
6857:
6853:
6848:
6844:
6843:
6837:
6833:
6829:
6825:
6821:
6820:
6819:
6815:
6813:
6809:
6803:
6802:
6787:
6783:
6779:
6778:
6777:
6776:
6772:
6768:
6763:
6761:
6756:
6752:
6750:
6744:
6742:
6738:
6727:
6723:
6719:
6707:
6703:
6699:
6695:
6691:
6690:
6681:
6677:
6673:
6669:
6665:
6661:
6658:
6655:
6651:
6650:
6649:
6645:
6641:
6637:
6636:
6635:
6631:
6627:
6623:
6615:
6611:
6607:
6603:
6600:
6596:
6592:
6591:
6590:
6586:
6582:
6578:
6577:
6576:
6572:
6568:
6564:
6560:
6555:
6553:
6551:
6548:
6542:
6540:
6536:
6532:
6530:
6524:
6523:
6522:
6518:
6514:
6510:
6509:
6508:
6503:
6496:
6492:
6476:
6472:
6468:
6464:
6460:
6459:
6458:
6454:
6450:
6446:
6445:
6444:
6440:
6436:
6432:
6429:
6425:
6421:
6416:
6412:
6408:
6404:
6398:
6394:
6392:
6388:
6384:
6380:
6376:
6372:
6368:
6364:
6360:
6359:
6358:
6354:
6350:
6345:
6344:
6343:
6339:
6338:contributions
6335:
6331:
6326:
6325:
6324:
6320:
6316:
6312:
6311:
6310:
6306:
6305:contributions
6302:
6298:
6294:
6284:
6280:
6276:
6272:
6268:
6267:
6266:
6262:
6261:contributions
6258:
6254:
6250:
6249:
6248:
6244:
6240:
6236:
6235:
6234:
6230:
6229:contributions
6226:
6222:
6218:
6212:
6208:
6204:
6200:
6199:
6198:
6194:
6192:
6188:
6182:
6181:
6166:
6165:
6164:
6160:
6158:
6154:
6148:
6147:
6132:
6131:
6130:
6126:
6122:
6118:
6117:
6116:
6112:
6110:
6106:
6100:
6099:
6083:
6080:
6076:
6070:
6066:
6062:
6058:
6054:
6053:
6052:
6048:
6047:contributions
6044:
6040:
6036:
6022:
6018:
6014:
6010:
6009:
6008:
6004:
6000:
5995:
5994:
5993:
5989:
5985:
5981:
5977:
5976:
5971:
5970:
5969:
5965:
5961:
5957:
5954:
5951:
5948:
5945:
5942:
5941:
5940:
5936:
5932:
5928:
5925:
5924:
5923:
5919:
5915:
5911:
5908:
5904:
5900:
5896:
5892:
5891:
5890:
5886:
5882:
5877:
5876:
5875:
5871:
5870:contributions
5867:
5863:
5859:
5851:
5847:
5843:
5839:
5835:
5834:
5833:
5829:
5825:
5821:
5820:
5819:
5815:
5811:
5807:
5803:
5802:
5801:
5797:
5793:
5789:
5788:WP:Plagiarism
5785:
5783:
5779:
5775:
5770:
5769:
5768:
5764:
5760:
5756:
5752:
5747:
5743:
5739:
5737:
5733:
5729:
5725:
5721:
5717:
5713:
5708:
5707:
5706:
5702:
5701:contributions
5698:
5694:
5689:
5688:
5687:
5686:
5682:
5678:
5668:
5663:
5659:
5657:
5647:
5643:
5637:
5633:
5630:
5624:
5619:
5617:
5613:
5610:
5606:
5602:
5598:
5593:
5589:
5584:
5580:
5576:
5572:
5560:
5556:
5552:
5548:
5547:
5544:
5540:
5536:
5531:
5529:
5525:
5523:
5519:
5513:
5512:
5496:
5494:
5490:
5486:
5482:
5478:
5474:
5470:
5466:
5462:
5459:
5454:
5450:
5442:
5438:
5434:
5429:
5428:
5427:
5423:
5419:
5414:
5410:
5409:
5408:
5404:
5400:
5396:
5395:
5394:
5390:
5386:
5383:
5379:
5378:
5377:
5373:
5369:
5365:
5364:
5363:
5362:
5358:
5354:
5350:
5340:
5339:
5335:
5331:
5327:
5323:
5319:
5318:
5314:
5310:
5305:
5301:
5300:
5296:
5292:
5291:
5287:
5283:
5279:
5278:
5274:
5270:
5266:
5262:
5259:
5255:
5254:
5251:
5245:
5244:
5241:
5240:Rotary Engine
5237:
5233:
5229:
5225:
5223:
5220:Are they the
5217:
5216:certainly not
5212:
5210:
5205:
5204:
5202:
5196:
5192:
5188:
5182:
5178:
5174:
5170:
5169:
5168:
5167:
5163:
5159:
5154:
5142:
5138:
5134:
5130:
5127:
5126:
5125:
5122:
5121:
5117:
5113:
5109:
5106:
5104:
5099:
5096:
5092:
5086:
5085:compadre o7)
5084:
5082:
5079:(Good idea, @
5071:
5070:
5066:
5062:
5053:
5050:
5047:
5044:
5041:
5038:
5037:
5036:
5033:
5031:
5025:
5023:
5019:
5015:
5014:
5010:
5006:
5003:
4994:
4993:
4989:
4985:
4973:
4969:
4965:
4961:
4957:
4953:
4949:
4945:
4941:
4937:
4933:
4931:
4927:
4921:
4920:
4904:
4903:
4902:
4898:
4896:
4892:
4886:
4885:
4869:
4867:
4864:This page is
4861:
4858:
4857:
4850:
4846:
4842:
4838:
4835:What? Where?
4834:
4831:
4827:
4823:
4819:
4815:
4810:
4806:
4803:
4799:
4795:
4791:
4787:
4786:
4785:
4781:
4777:
4773:
4772:
4771:
4767:
4763:
4758:
4757:
4756:
4752:
4748:
4744:
4740:
4736:
4732:
4728:
4724:
4721:
4720:
4719:
4715:
4711:
4707:
4703:
4699:
4695:
4692:
4688:
4685:
4681:
4677:
4673:
4669:
4668:
4667:
4666:
4662:
4658:
4653:
4652:
4648:
4644:
4627:
4623:
4619:
4615:
4614:I've no idea.
4611:
4609:
4605:
4601:
4597:
4596:
4595:
4591:
4587:
4583:
4582:
4581:
4577:
4573:
4570:
4566:
4565:
4564:
4560:
4556:
4551:
4550:
4549:
4545:
4541:
4538:
4535:
4532:
4528:
4510:
4506:
4502:
4497:
4496:
4495:
4491:
4487:
4482:
4481:
4480:
4479:
4478:
4477:
4476:
4472:
4468:
4463:
4462:
4461:
4457:
4453:
4449:
4448:
4447:
4443:
4439:
4435:
4434:
4433:
4429:
4425:
4420:
4419:
4418:
4414:
4410:
4406:
4405:
4404:
4400:
4396:
4391:
4390:
4389:
4388:
4385:
4363:
4359:
4355:
4352:
4349:
4346:
4345:an even worse
4342:
4338:
4334:
4330:
4326:
4323:
4318:
4313:
4310:
4306:
4302:
4299:
4294:
4286:
4282:
4278:
4273:
4272:
4271:
4267:
4263:
4259:
4255:
4254:
4253:
4252:
4251:
4247:
4243:
4238:
4235:
4234:
4233:
4229:
4225:
4221:
4217:
4216:
4215:
4211:
4207:
4203:
4199:
4196:
4191:
4187:
4182:
4181:
4180:
4176:
4172:
4168:
4152:
4148:
4144:
4140:
4137:
4133:
4132:
4131:
4127:
4123:
4119:
4115:
4111:
4110:
4109:
4105:
4101:
4098:
4094:
4092:
4089:
4088:
4080:
4077:
4076:
4075:
4071:
4067:
4062:
4061:
4060:
4057:
4056:
4049:
4045:
4041:
4040:
4039:
4035:
4031:
4026:
4021:
4020:
4019:
4015:
4011:
4007:
4002:
4001:
4000:
3996:
3992:
3988:
3984:
3983:
3982:
3978:
3974:
3969:
3968:
3967:
3963:
3959:
3955:
3954:
3953:
3949:
3945:
3940:
3939:
3938:
3934:
3930:
3926:
3922:
3921:
3920:
3919:
3915:
3911:
3903:
3899:
3895:
3891:
3890:
3883:
3880:
3879:Rotary Engine
3876:
3872:
3871:
3870:
3866:
3862:
3859:
3856:
3855:
3854:
3853:
3847:
3842:
3838:
3834:
3830:
3826:
3825:
3821:
3818:
3814:
3810:
3809:
3803:
3799:
3798:
3793:
3792:
3790:
3787:
3783:
3780:
3776:
3771:
3768:
3765:
3761:
3757:
3753:
3750:
3748:
3745:
3740:
3735:
3733:
3727:
3726:
3724:
3720:
3716:
3714:
3709:
3707:
3703:
3701:
3698:
3697:
3695:
3694:Rotary Engine
3691:
3686:
3681:
3680:
3678:
3670:
3666:
3662:
3657:
3653:
3649:
3645:
3641:
3640:
3639:
3638:
3637:
3633:
3629:
3625:
3620:
3618:
3612:
3608:
3607:
3606:
3602:
3598:
3594:
3590:
3589:
3588:
3584:
3580:
3576:
3573:
3572:
3571:
3567:
3563:
3559:
3555:
3551:
3547:
3543:
3538:
3534:
3531:
3528:
3526:
3522:
3518:
3513:
3509:
3505:
3501:
3497:
3495:
3491:
3487:
3483:
3479:
3477:
3473:
3472:
3471:
3467:
3463:
3459:
3456:
3454:
3450:
3449:
3448:
3447:
3443:
3439:
3434:
3429:
3417:
3412:
3406:
3405:
3394:
3391:
3390:
3387:
3383:
3379:
3375:
3372:
3371:
3368:
3364:
3360:
3355:
3352:
3351:
3346:
3342:
3337:
3331:
3330:
3327:
3324:
3319:
3318:
3317:
3313:
3308:
3301:
3295:
3292:
3290:
3286:
3282:
3281:21 Andromedae
3278:
3275:
3274:
3271:
3267:
3263:
3259:
3255:
3254:
3250:
3246:
3242:
3238:
3235:
3232:
3228:
3224:
3220:
3216:
3210:
3207:
3205:
3201:
3199:
3195:
3189:
3188:
3173:
3171:
3167:
3163:
3159:
3155:
3153:
3149:
3146:
3144:
3140:
3136:
3132:
3128:
3125:
3123:
3119:
3118:contributions
3115:
3111:
3107:
3103:
3100:
3099:
3093:
3092:
3088:
3083:
3077:
3076:
3073:
3070:
3065:
3061:
3057:
3053:
3041:
3037:
3033:
3029:
3025:
3021:
3017:
3013:
3009:
3005:
3001:
2997:
2993:
2989:
2985:
2981:
2977:
2973:
2969:
2965:
2961:
2957:
2953:
2949:
2945:
2941:
2938:
2932:
2931:
2930:
2929:
2925:
2920:
2914:
2913:
2910:
2907:
2898:
2897:
2892:
2890:
2889:
2884:
2882:
2881:
2876:
2874:
2873:
2868:
2866:
2865:
2860:
2859:
2858:
2856:
2855:
2844:
2838:
2837:
2833:
2832:
2830:
2828:
2817:
2813:
2806:
2805:
2801:
2794:
2793:
2790:
2786:
2778:
2775:
2774:
2773:
2769:
2768:
2762:
2760:
2756:
2752:
2748:
2744:
2741:
2740:
2736:
2733:
2732:
2727:
2723:
2722:
2721:
2717:
2715:
2711:
2705:
2704:
2689:
2684:
2680:
2676:
2674:
2670:
2664:
2663:
2645:
2644:
2643:
2639:
2635:
2630:
2627:
2623:
2618:
2617:
2616:
2615:
2612:
2611:
2607:
2604:
2603:
2597:
2595:
2590:
2581:
2575:
2574:
2570:
2569:
2567:
2565:
2554:
2550:
2543:
2542:
2538:
2531:
2530:
2527:
2520:
2515:
2504:
2500:This page is
2499:
2496:
2492:
2489:
2484:
2479:
2475:
2472:
2471:
2465:
2461:
2458:
2454:
2451:
2447:
2446:
2443:
2438:
2437:
2427:
2423:
2419:
2415:
2411:
2407:
2403:
2399:
2395:
2391:
2387:
2383:
2379:
2375:
2371:
2367:
2363:
2359:
2355:
2351:
2347:
2343:
2339:
2335:
2331:
2327:
2323:
2319:
2315:
2311:
2307:
2303:
2299:
2295:
2291:
2287:
2283:
2279:
2275:
2271:
2267:
2263:
2259:
2255:
2251:
2247:
2243:
2239:
2235:
2231:
2227:
2223:
2219:
2215:
2211:
2207:
2203:
2199:
2195:
2191:
2187:
2183:
2179:
2175:
2171:
2167:
2163:
2159:
2155:
2151:
2147:
2143:
2139:
2135:
2131:
2127:
2123:
2119:
2115:
2111:
2107:
2103:
2099:
2095:
2091:
2087:
2083:
2079:
2075:
2071:
2067:
2063:
2059:
2055:
2051:
2047:
2043:
2039:
2035:
2031:
2027:
2023:
2019:
2015:
2011:
2007:
2003:
1999:
1995:
1991:
1987:
1983:
1979:
1975:
1971:
1967:
1963:
1959:
1955:
1951:
1947:
1943:
1939:
1935:
1931:
1927:
1923:
1919:
1915:
1911:
1907:
1903:
1899:
1895:
1891:
1887:
1883:
1879:
1875:
1871:
1867:
1863:
1859:
1855:
1851:
1847:
1843:
1839:
1835:
1831:
1827:
1823:
1819:
1815:
1811:
1807:
1803:
1799:
1795:
1791:
1787:
1783:
1779:
1775:
1771:
1767:
1763:
1759:
1755:
1751:
1747:
1743:
1739:
1735:
1731:
1727:
1723:
1719:
1715:
1711:
1707:
1703:
1699:
1695:
1691:
1687:
1683:
1679:
1675:
1671:
1667:
1663:
1659:
1655:
1651:
1647:
1643:
1639:
1635:
1631:
1627:
1623:
1619:
1615:
1611:
1607:
1603:
1599:
1595:
1591:
1587:
1583:
1579:
1575:
1571:
1567:
1563:
1559:
1555:
1551:
1547:
1543:
1539:
1535:
1531:
1527:
1523:
1519:
1515:
1511:
1507:
1503:
1499:
1495:
1491:
1487:
1483:
1479:
1475:
1471:
1467:
1463:
1459:
1455:
1451:
1447:
1443:
1439:
1435:
1431:
1427:
1423:
1419:
1415:
1411:
1407:
1403:
1399:
1395:
1391:
1387:
1383:
1379:
1375:
1371:
1367:
1363:
1359:
1355:
1351:
1347:
1343:
1339:
1335:
1331:
1327:
1323:
1319:
1315:
1311:
1307:
1303:
1299:
1295:
1291:
1287:
1283:
1279:
1275:
1271:
1267:
1263:
1259:
1255:
1251:
1247:
1243:
1239:
1235:
1231:
1227:
1223:
1219:
1215:
1211:
1207:
1203:
1199:
1195:
1191:
1187:
1183:
1179:
1175:
1171:
1167:
1163:
1159:
1155:
1151:
1147:
1143:
1139:
1135:
1131:
1127:
1123:
1119:
1115:
1111:
1107:
1103:
1099:
1095:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1079:
1075:
1071:
1067:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1051:
1047:
1043:
1039:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1023:
1019:
1015:
1011:
1007:
1003:
999:
995:
991:
987:
983:
979:
975:
971:
967:
963:
959:
955:
951:
947:
943:
939:
935:
931:
927:
923:
919:
915:
911:
907:
903:
899:
895:
891:
887:
883:
879:
875:
871:
867:
863:
859:
855:
851:
847:
843:
839:
835:
831:
827:
823:
819:
815:
811:
807:
803:
799:
795:
791:
787:
783:
779:
775:
771:
767:
763:
759:
755:
751:
747:
743:
739:
735:
731:
727:
723:
719:
715:
711:
707:
703:
699:
695:
691:
687:
683:
679:
675:
671:
667:
663:
659:
655:
651:
647:
643:
639:
635:
631:
627:
618:
617:
615:
611:
592:
589:
583:
570:
563:
556:
555:
549:
543:
540:
538:
535:
531:
530:Miscellaneous
528:
526:
523:
521:
518:
516:
513:
511:
508:
506:
503:
502:
501:
498:
496:
493:
489:
486:
484:
481:
479:
476:
474:
471:
470:
468:
464:
461:
459:
456:
455:
454:
451:
447:
444:
442:
439:
437:
434:
433:
431:
430:
428:
424:
418:
415:
412:
408:
405:
403:
400:
396:
393:
391:
388:
386:
383:
382:
381:
378:
376:
373:
371:
368:
366:
363:
362:
360:
356:
350:
347:
343:
340:
338:
335:
333:
330:
328:
325:
323:
320:
318:
315:
314:
313:
310:
308:
305:
303:
300:
298:
295:
293:
290:
288:
285:
283:
280:
279:
277:
275:Page handling
273:
267:
264:
262:
259:
257:
254:
250:
247:
245:
242:
241:
240:
237:
235:
232:
230:
227:
225:
222:
220:
217:
215:
212:
210:
207:
205:
202:
200:
197:
195:
192:
188:
185:
183:
180:
179:
177:
175:
172:
171:
169:
165:
159:
156:
154:
151:
149:
146:
144:
141:
139:
136:
134:
131:
129:
126:
124:
121:
119:
116:
114:
111:
109:
106:
102:
99:
97:
94:
93:
91:
90:
88:
84:
79:
75:
71:
65:
61:
54:
49:
47:
42:
40:
35:
34:
31:
19:
14498:
14493:isinterested
14485:
14441:
14421:
14413:
14409:
14396:
14393:WP:EXPERTSPS
14387:
14383:
14378:
14324:syllabus at
14320:other topic.
14306:
14302:
14290:
14287:
14257:
14252:isinterested
14244:
14201:
14196:isinterested
14188:
14153:Super Goku V
14148:
14144:
14127:
14116:(2): 93â96.
14113:
14109:
14105:
14099:
14093:
14089:
14085:
14073:
14062:
14038:WP:RFCBEFORE
14031:
13985:
13980:isinterested
13972:
13881:
13876:isinterested
13868:
13832:
13825:
13821:
13820:
13817:
13813:
13809:
13806:
13802:
13800:
13789:
13767:
13762:isinterested
13754:
13724:
13714:
13703:
13697:
13675:
13670:isinterested
13662:
13641:
13610:
13609:
13592:
13538:
13454:
13441:Slatersteven
13419:Slatersteven
13403:Slatersteven
13400:
13383:
13378:isinterested
13370:
13353:Slatersteven
13339:Slatersteven
13318:I will admo
13317:
13280:
13200:
13161:
13157:
13155:
13133:
13128:isinterested
13120:
13065:
13058:
13032:
13025:
12991:Launchballer
12981:
12920:
12915:isinterested
12907:
12881:
12877:WP:REPUTABLE
12810:
12806:
12804:
12787:
12783:
12781:
12773:WP:REPUTABLE
12726:
12722:
12717:
12711:
12706:
12663:
12629:
12624:isinterested
12616:
12576:
12571:isinterested
12563:
12436:
12432:
12423:
12415:
12392:
12385:
12345:me on reply)
12303:
12302:
12291:
12265:WP:EXPERTSPS
12236:
12227:me on reply)
12210:WP:EXPERTSPS
12202:WP:EXPERTSPS
12192:Ars Technica
12186:The Register
12136:
12131:isinterested
12123:
12097:
12096:
12067:
12062:isinterested
12054:
12031:
12010:
12009:
11999:
11975:
11960:
11903:
11902:
11887:The Register
11885:
11799:
11794:isinterested
11786:
11764:
11759:
11752:
11699:
11672:Byline times
11669:
11650:
11645:isinterested
11637:
11581:The Guardian
11564:
11492:
11488:
11388:MaskedSinger
11385:
11360:
11348:
11340:
11298:
11293:isinterested
11285:
11193:
11188:isinterested
11180:
11130:also has an
11094:
11063:
11053:
11022:
11016:
11013:up as well:
10994:
10988:
10985:and others:
10963:
10817:Daily Mail.
10792:Sean.hoyland
10759:Sean.hoyland
10725:
10684:
10592:
10576:
10519:
10480:
10356:
10298:
10176:
10171:isinterested
10163:
10067:TrangaBellam
10049:TrangaBellam
10028:
9914:
9866:Onceinawhile
9845:
9818:Onceinawhile
9759:The National
9749:
9740:
9736:
9720:
9665:
9643:
9574:
9543:
9540:The Guardian
9532:
9503:
9419:
9416:not reliable
9415:
9375:
9343:
9227:
9177:
9138:
9112:
9037:
8983:
8944:Sean.hoyland
8764:
8757:
8694:
8589:
8480:
8477:
8473:
8469:
8465:
8461:
8457:
8453:
8452:
8255:
8240:
8221:
8204:
8163:
8139:
8123:
8117:
8087:
8082:isinterested
8074:
8052:
7986:
7982:
7946:, 9 Sep 2024
7916:
7892:
7887:isinterested
7879:
7855:
7850:isinterested
7842:
7801:
7795:
7777:
7763:
7762:
7758:
7741:
7736:isinterested
7728:
7720:
7686:
7614:
7598:this article
7569:
7563:
7551:
7541:
7535:
7525:
7512:
7496:
7486:
7451:
7388:
7287:
7280:
7272:
7257:
7250:
7242:
7222:
7207:
7204:
7201:
7198:
7196:
7172:
7167:isinterested
7159:
7125:
7121:
7084:
7079:isinterested
7071:
6974:
6970:
6966:
6962:
6938:
6856:reporting on
6855:
6841:
6839:
6805:
6800:isinterested
6792:
6764:
6760:WP:ABOUTSELF
6757:
6755:for Boaler.
6753:
6748:
6745:
6736:isinterested
6718:Slatersteven
6715:
6598:
6594:
6538:
6528:
6526:
6462:
6414:
6410:
6406:
6402:
6400:
6378:
6184:
6179:isinterested
6171:
6150:
6145:isinterested
6137:
6102:
6097:isinterested
6089:
6079:WP:ABOUTSELF
5973:
5750:
5746:WP:BLPPUBLIC
5741:
5728:Slatersteven
5674:
5662:
5649:. Retrieved
5645:
5638:
5634:
5626:
5621:
5614:
5568:
5515:
5510:isinterested
5502:
5480:
5399:Slatersteven
5368:Slatersteven
5346:
5325:
5321:
5320:
5303:
5302:
5288:
5281:
5280:
5257:
5256:
5246:
5234:; again per
5227:
5219:
5215:
5213:
5208:
5206:
5200:
5198:
5190:
5186:
5185:
5173:Slatersteven
5152:
5150:
5128:
5123:
5110:
5107:
5102:
5100:
5094:
5090:
5088:
5081:Slatersteven
5078:
5077:
5057:
5051:
5034:
5027:
5017:
5016:
5005:Slatersteven
5001:
5000:
4984:Slatersteven
4981:
4962:argument. --
4951:
4923:
4918:isinterested
4910:
4888:
4883:isinterested
4875:
4865:
4863:
4859:
4832:
4808:
4804:
4790:Slatersteven
4762:Slatersteven
4734:
4726:
4722:
4690:
4657:Slatersteven
4654:
4643:Slatersteven
4640:
4613:
4586:Slatersteven
4486:Slatersteven
4438:Slatersteven
4380:
4344:
4341:Slatersteven
4340:
4336:
4332:
4328:
4321:
4316:
4308:
4297:
4262:Slatersteven
4224:Slatersteven
4219:
4201:
4171:Slatersteven
4117:
4083:
4078:
4051:
4047:
4024:
4005:
3987:previous RfC
3906:
3840:
3836:
3832:
3820:
3816:
3812:
3807:
3805:
3801:
3796:
3795:
3774:
3759:
3743:
3742:
3731:
3729:
3710:
3705:
3704:
3699:
3684:
3644:Slatersteven
3616:
3614:
3597:Slatersteven
3562:Slatersteven
3499:
3425:
3397:
3392:
3373:
3353:
3328:
3325:
3322:
3293:
3276:
3258:LaundryPizza
3236:
3213:â Preceding
3208:
3191:
3186:isinterested
3178:
3169:
3151:
3147:
3126:
3101:
3074:
3071:
3068:
3051:
3050:
2988:COIBot-Local
2972:MER-C X-wiki
2911:
2908:
2905:
2902:
2893:
2885:
2877:
2869:
2861:
2853:
2850:
2834:
2824:
2789:
2784:
2771:
2766:
2764:
2738:
2734:
2730:
2707:
2702:isinterested
2694:
2688:WP:RSCONTEXT
2666:
2661:isinterested
2653:
2634:DarkeruTomoe
2609:
2605:
2601:
2598:
2589:Am I Racist?
2587:
2571:
2561:
2526:
2519:
2435:
2434:
607:
606:
575:
552:
500:Village pump
488:New articles
453:Edit filters
432:Arbitration
358:User conduct
223:
143:Open proxies
60:Noticeboards
14004:Jattlife121
13944:Jattlife121
13929:Jattlife121
13852:Jattlife121
13834:Jattlife121
13575:Boynamedsue
13511:Rjjiii (ii)
13475:Nat Gertler
13018:which says
13012:Marco Eagle
12599:Jattlife121
12535:Andromedean
12520:Jattlife121
12499:Jattlife121
12403:Jattlife121
11956:WP:NEWSORGs
11733:Andromedean
11703:Andromedean
11519:Selfstudier
11467:Selfstudier
11436:Makeandtoss
11403:Selfstudier
11345:WP:NOTTRUTH
11217:Andromedean
11160:1/ Reliable
11115:Selfstudier
11100:Andromedean
11065:in upheaval
11007:The Forward
10938:Selfstudier
10918:Selfstudier
10846:Iskandar323
10630:Selfstudier
10616:Selfstudier
10579:Selfstudier
10562:Iskandar323
10546:Boynamedsue
10520:it is an RS
10459:Andromedean
10444:Boynamedsue
10379:Iskandar323
10339:Selfstudier
10337:We'll see.
10322:Andromedean
10304:Boynamedsue
10234:Andromedean
10124:Iskandar323
10109:Makeandtoss
9986:Iskandar323
9955:Boynamedsue
9901:Boynamedsue
9741:rather than
9598:Andromedean
9490:Andromedean
9476:Selfstudier
9400:Selfstudier
9194:Selfstudier
9097:Iskandar323
9082:Selfstudier
8556:Iskandar323
8482:Boynamedsue
8458:End of 2019
8410:Boynamedsue
8367:Boynamedsue
8352:Boynamedsue
8314:Boynamedsue
8278:Boynamedsue
8244:Boynamedsue
8138:We need to
8058:Selfstudier
8033:Iskandar323
7989:a statement
7804:The C of E
7783:Boynamedsue
7689:The C of E
7617:The C of E
7572:The C of E
7515:reliability
7138:Sangdeboeuf
7104:Will Orrick
6991:Will Orrick
6949:Sangdeboeuf
6921:Will Orrick
6887:Will Orrick
6863:Sangdeboeuf
6672:Sangdeboeuf
6606:Sangdeboeuf
6567:Sangdeboeuf
6467:Sangdeboeuf
6435:Sangdeboeuf
6383:Sangdeboeuf
6013:Sangdeboeuf
5984:Sangdeboeuf
5623:processes."
5616:Sangdeboeuf
5382:Talk:Yasuke
5112:Himaldrmann
4866:not a forum
4618:Himaldrmann
4572:Himaldrmann
4540:Himaldrmann
4354:Himaldrmann
3910:Boynamedsue
3875:Himaldrmann
3861:Himaldrmann
3815:that it is
3400:The C of E
3262:SkyFlubbler
3256:By the way
3040:AboutUs.com
3036:domaintools
2980:Links on en
2978:âą Reports:
2935:Linksearch
2503:not a forum
2478:deprecation
571:in context!
446:Enforcement
402:Sockpuppets
307:Importation
266:Translation
178:Copyrights
113:Bureaucrats
14520:Categories
14458:WT:HISTORY
14044:. Thanks,
13966:WP:BLPNAME
13727:due weight
13201:Daily Mail
13104:Left guide
12946:Jtbobwaysf
12861:Left guide
12820:Left guide
12798:clause of
12775:clause of
12767:clause of
12761:emphasis):
12721:) In that
12687:Left guide
12557:guidelines
12416:References
12306:Newslinger
12277:Quackwatch
12176:Newslinger
12159:Jtbobwaysf
12119:Thanks --
12100:Newslinger
12013:Newslinger
11952:WP:SELFPUB
11906:Newslinger
11547:Jay Rayner
11361:everything
11011:an article
10997:Jay Rayner
10983:Jay Rayner
10859:breaches.
10525:Jtbobwaysf
10420:Knowledge.
10103:, and now
9899:deprecate.
9645:mediation.
9635:Hacked Off
9238:: compare
9168:Âżquestion?
9121:Âżquestion?
9060:Âżquestion?
8695:additional
8474:April 2023
8470:2021- 2023
8426:operation.
7565:Daily Mail
7558:as in the
7556:deprecated
7546:unreliable
7544:Generally
7528:Generally
7394:Jtbobwaysf
7275:cite them.
7018:| NY Times
7016:, and the
6975:ad hominem
6668:CalMatters
6626:XOR'easter
5980:due weight
5943:See also:
5551:Jtbobwaysf
5322:It depends
5304:It depends
5258:It depends
5187:It depends
5147:It depends
4082:the RfC'.
3837:whatsoever
3359:Jtbobwaysf
3047:Background
3034:âą Domain:
3026:âą Google:
2940:(insource)
2894:Option 5:
2886:Option 4:
2878:Option 3:
2870:Option 2:
2862:Option 1:
2731:Snowman304
2602:Snowman304
469:Questions
349:Undeletion
342:Miscellany
327:Categories
302:Protection
14462:SamuelRiv
14450:WP:HISTRS
14431:applies.
14429:WP:PARITY
14418:syllabubs
14360:SamuelRiv
14356:Talk:Geji
13640:we read:
13544:SamuelRiv
13301:Alpha3031
12854:Alpha3031
12835:Alpha3031
12796:WP:SOURCE
12516:SamuelRiv
12485:SamuelRiv
12368:SamuelRiv
12297:RSP entry
12282:RSP entry
11893:RSP entry
11868:Wiktorpyk
11854:Wiktorpyk
11838:SamuelRiv
11819:Wiktorpyk
11769:Wiktorpyk
11497:Aquillion
11365:Aquillion
11322:accuracy.
10774:Tom Gross
10634:WP:GUNREL
9694:SamuelRiv
9690:HackedOff
9617:SamuelRiv
9508:Aquillion
9462:SamuelRiv
8454:2018-2019
8140:deprecate
8135:reasons.)
8125:repeated.
7764:North8000
7680:North8000
7552:Option 4:
7542:Option 3:
7536:Option 2:
7526:Option 1:
7408:WP:RSBIAS
6987:blog post
6847:straw man
6726:SamuelRiv
6698:Aquillion
6559:Jo Boaler
6395:Your own
6315:SamuelRiv
5824:SamuelRiv
5792:SamuelRiv
5571:Jo Boaler
5353:SamuelRiv
5349:WP:HISTRS
5330:Aquillion
4964:Aquillion
4776:SamuelRiv
4747:SamuelRiv
4555:SamuelRiv
4329:arguendo,
4122:SamuelRiv
4066:SamuelRiv
4030:SamuelRiv
3991:SamuelRiv
3958:Ramos1990
3811:at all":
3764:SamuelRiv
3721:And, per
3713:WP:HISTRS
3628:SamuelRiv
3593:wp:fringe
3579:SamuelRiv
3575:WP:HISTRS
3517:SamuelRiv
3504:WP:HISTRS
3482:attribute
3219:Mrfoogles
3168:, rather
3102:Deprecate
3002:âą COIBot-
2968:Spamcheck
2896:Blacklist
2888:Deprecate
2772:Nidhiki05
2751:JoelleJay
2488:Consensus
2442:Shortcuts
515:Proposals
510:Technical
473:Help desk
458:Requested
417:Vandalism
407:Usernames
380:Sanctions
332:Templates
322:Redirects
249:Whitelist
244:Blacklist
153:Oversight
128:Education
101:Incidents
74:dashboard
14454:WT:JAPAN
14422:too much
14046:Levivich
13631:WP:SPSes
13539:The Mail
13525:NadVolum
13489:NadVolum
13325:NadVolum
13162:Telegram
13158:Fox News
13044:RoySmith
12999:RoySmith
12811:accuracy
12788:accuracy
12553:policies
12341:(please
12223:(please
12180:Andrevan
12089:"RFC on"
12030:Agreed.
12004:reliable
11934:NadVolum
11571:We have
11453:Springee
11231:Cortador
11069:Ynetnews
11009:now has
10973:Further
10742:Springee
10045:declared
9860:It went
9439:Cortador
9414:I'd say
9275:Zero0000
8925:Cortador
8909:Springee
8875:Springee
8466:Mid-2021
7966:Ynetnews
7796:Option 3
7778:Option 2
7759:Option 2
7721:Option 2
7560:2017 RfC
7530:reliable
7281:Schazjmd
7251:Schazjmd
7126:NY Times
6983:web page
5895:Muboshgu
5881:Blueboar
5846:contribs
5814:contribs
5763:contribs
5646:Fox News
5273:contribs
5158:Blueboar
5108:Cheers,
5093:than to
4845:contribs
4822:contribs
4714:contribs
4612:...tbh,
4568:article.
3908:article.
3822:sources.
3817:verboten
3624:WP:MEDRS
3511:reading.
3393:Option 4
3374:Option 4
3354:Option 4
3277:Option 4
3237:Option 4
3227:contribs
3215:unsigned
3209:Option 4
3162:WP:ASTRO
3148:Option 4
3010:, &
2996:advanced
610:archived
520:Idea lab
478:Teahouse
441:Requests
317:Articles
187:Problems
14489:ctively
14456:and/or
14388:primary
14248:ctively
14192:ctively
13976:ctively
13872:ctively
13758:ctively
13666:ctively
13612:Velella
13374:ctively
13177:to the
13160:or the
13124:ctively
13020:Gannett
12961:Bagumba
12911:ctively
12887:Bagumba
12769:WP:NPOV
12748:Bagumba
12733:Bagumba
12620:ctively
12567:ctively
12343:mention
12225:mention
12198:WP:GREL
12127:ctively
12058:ctively
11790:ctively
11641:ctively
11615:Andreas
11588:Haaretz
11318:topics?
11289:ctively
11248:Andreas
11215:shows.
11184:ctively
11139:Andreas
11132:article
11073:Andreas
11052:Quote:
10819:Andreas
10689:Andreas
10638:Andreas
10597:Andreas
10167:ctively
10043:JC has
9882:state.
9784:Andreas
9780:reports
9750:unknown
9670:Andreas
9556:Andreas
9546:Pogrund
9529:article
9378:Andreas
9284:Andreas
9246:Andreas
9236:Haaretz
9224:article
9164:Alaexis
9145:Andreas
9117:Alaexis
9056:Alaexis
9001:Andreas
8890:Andreas
8817:Andreas
8771:Andreas
8672:Andreas
8664:reports
8518:Andreas
8224:Andreas
8144:Andreas
8078:ctively
7993:Andreas
7973:claims.
7944:Haaretz
7883:ctively
7846:ctively
7732:ctively
7562:of the
7269:article
7163:ctively
7075:ctively
6796:ctively
6786:WP:BLPN
6782:WP:NPOV
6732:ctively
6175:ctively
6141:ctively
6093:ctively
5651:2 April
5588:protect
5583:history
5506:ctively
5481:Bad RFC
5343:Bad RfC
4914:ctively
4879:ctively
4860:Comment
4536:Cheers,
4350:Cheers,
4258:samurai
3857:Cheers,
3507:issue.)
3323:Laundry
3294:Comment
3247:or the
3182:ctively
3069:Laundry
2992:tracked
2964:wikt:fr
2960:wikt:en
2906:Laundry
2698:ctively
2657:ctively
2594:Twitchy
2457:WP:RS/N
588:Context
287:Mergers
86:General
14446:WP:DUE
14065:WP:MED
13740:«Talk»
13635:WP:VNT
13047:(talk)
13002:(talk)
12713:sales.
12677:, and
12456:voorts
12327:wrote.
12253:WP:UBO
12048:WP:SPS
11990:WP:SPS
11561:quoted
11357:WP:BLP
11055:false.
11000:leave.
10916:Sorry
10707:worse.
9424:Jeppiz
9040:buidhe
8982:Quote:
8014:voorts
7923:WP:RSP
7412:voorts
7389:Non-RS
7354:voorts
7308:voorts
7302:and a
7288:(talk)
7258:(talk)
7136:now. â
7036:voorts
6985:and a
6902:voorts
6842:equity
6749:equity
6741:voorts
6739:, and
6694:WP:BLP
6543:you're
6330:voorts
6297:voorts
6271:WP:BLP
6253:voorts
6221:voorts
6057:WP:DUE
6039:voorts
5982:IMO. â
5862:voorts
5693:voorts
5592:delete
4738:place.
4731:WP:Due
4598:None.
4136:Yasuke
3925:Yasuke
3808:weight
3806:as to
3617:always
3536:time."
3428:Yasuke
3245:Saturn
3241:WT:AST
3110:voorts
3096:Survey
3062:, and
3028:search
2984:COIBot
2956:simple
2728:list.
2726:WP:RSP
2495:policy
2464:WP:V/N
2450:WP:RSN
505:Policy
292:Splits
14414:maybe
14410:might
14347:diff
14344:with
14301:says
14036:, an
13637:. In
13194:WP:RS
13179:WP:RS
13059:Green
13026:Green
12777:WP:RS
12758:WP:RS
12333:Chess
12257:WP:QS
12238:Andre
12215:Chess
12205:them.
12033:Andre
11962:Andre
11719:Cdjp1
11605:check
11018:Gaza.
10977:from
10837:2019,
10727:Andre
10482:Andre
10474:WT:RS
10030:Andre
9916:Andre
9847:Andre
9722:Andre
9593:wrote
9576:Andre
9538:From
9317:DFlhb
9179:Andre
9135:notes
9133:e.g.
8633:above
7875:. --
7505:ended
7227:Mhorg
5609:views
5601:watch
5597:links
5458:Dinka
5290:Andre
5236:WP:RS
5195:WP:RS
5030:WP:RS
5022:WP:RS
4956:WP:RS
4948:WP:RS
4944:WP:RS
4324:"<
4314:: -->
4309:other
4300:"<
4295:: -->
3829:WP:RS
3797:edit:
3779:WP:RS
3744:edit:
3723:WP:RS
3687:"<
3682:: -->
3611:WP:RS
3558:wp:or
3326:Pizza
3072:Pizza
3012:XWiki
3008:Local
2909:Pizza
2843:ended
2783:RfC:
2690:. --
2580:ended
426:Other
337:Files
297:Moves
256:Style
16:<
14466:talk
14364:talk
14342:Geji
14328:did.
14326:Geji
14293:this
14288:Hi,
14234:bold
14224:talk
14171:talk
14157:talk
14134:talk
14050:talk
14008:talk
13948:talk
13933:talk
13856:talk
13838:talk
13707:and
13650:talk
13604:here
13602:and
13600:here
13596:here
13579:talk
13548:talk
13529:talk
13515:talk
13493:talk
13479:talk
13465:talk
13445:talk
13431:talk
13407:talk
13357:talk
13343:talk
13329:talk
13289:talk
13199:The
13108:talk
13088:asem
13016:here
12989:and
12965:talk
12950:talk
12891:talk
12865:talk
12824:talk
12809:and
12800:WP:V
12786:and
12771:and
12737:talk
12723:Post
12691:talk
12683:this
12603:talk
12555:and
12539:talk
12524:talk
12503:talk
12489:talk
12460:talk
12407:talk
12372:talk
12337:talk
12313:talk
12286:and
12219:talk
12190:and
12178:and
12163:talk
12107:talk
12095:. â
12020:talk
11938:talk
11913:talk
11901:. â
11872:talk
11858:talk
11842:talk
11832:yet.
11823:talk
11773:talk
11737:talk
11723:talk
11707:talk
11523:talk
11501:talk
11493:most
11471:talk
11457:talk
11440:talk
11425:talk
11416:law.
11407:talk
11392:talk
11369:talk
11331:talk
11272:talk
11235:talk
11221:talk
11119:talk
11104:talk
10942:talk
10927:talk
10898:talk
10874:ago.
10865:talk
10850:talk
10796:talk
10782:talk
10763:talk
10746:talk
10716:talk
10685:this
10675:talk
10620:talk
10583:talk
10566:talk
10550:talk
10529:talk
10502:talk
10478:WT:V
10463:talk
10448:talk
10430:talk
10398:talk
10383:talk
10366:talk
10343:talk
10326:talk
10308:talk
10269:talk
10238:talk
10200:talk
10145:talk
10128:talk
10113:talk
10085:talk
10071:talk
10053:talk
10019:talk
9990:talk
9974:talk
9959:talk
9905:talk
9888:talk
9870:talk
9836:talk
9822:talk
9812:and
9698:talk
9653:talk
9631:blog
9621:talk
9612:IPSO
9602:talk
9512:talk
9494:talk
9480:talk
9466:talk
9443:talk
9428:talk
9404:talk
9321:talk
9303:Zero
9266:Zero
9241:vs.
9228:Five
9198:talk
9129:The
9101:talk
9086:talk
9070:Zero
8958:Zero
8948:talk
8929:talk
8913:talk
8879:talk
8840:talk
8798:talk
8604:talk
8576:talk
8560:talk
8545:talk
8486:talk
8435:talk
8414:talk
8400:talk
8371:talk
8356:talk
8335:talk
8318:talk
8303:talk
8282:talk
8263:talk
8248:talk
8107:Zero
8062:talk
8054:case
8037:talk
8018:talk
7814:talk
7787:talk
7769:talk
7699:talk
7676:and
7643:talk
7627:talk
7582:talk
7434:talk
7416:talk
7398:talk
7379:talk
7358:talk
7344:talk
7312:talk
7231:talk
7208:Path
7142:talk
7124:and
7120:The
7108:talk
7059:talk
7040:talk
7026:talk
6995:talk
6953:talk
6935:here
6925:talk
6906:talk
6891:talk
6882:and
6867:talk
6828:talk
6771:talk
6702:talk
6676:talk
6666:and
6644:talk
6630:talk
6610:talk
6585:talk
6571:talk
6517:talk
6497:. â
6471:talk
6453:talk
6439:talk
6387:talk
6353:talk
6334:talk
6319:talk
6301:talk
6279:talk
6257:talk
6243:talk
6225:talk
6207:talk
6125:talk
6065:talk
6043:talk
6017:talk
6003:talk
5988:talk
5964:talk
5935:talk
5918:talk
5899:talk
5885:talk
5866:talk
5842:talk
5828:talk
5810:talk
5796:talk
5778:talk
5759:talk
5732:talk
5716:talk
5697:talk
5681:talk
5653:2024
5605:logs
5579:talk
5575:edit
5555:talk
5539:talk
5489:talk
5469:talk
5465:Relm
5437:talk
5422:talk
5403:talk
5389:talk
5372:talk
5357:talk
5334:talk
5326:same
5313:talk
5269:talk
5265:Gitz
5250:Zero
5177:talk
5162:talk
5137:talk
5116:talk
5095:Yes,
5065:talk
5028:Per
5009:talk
4988:talk
4968:talk
4841:talk
4837:Gitz
4818:talk
4814:Gitz
4794:talk
4780:talk
4766:talk
4751:talk
4710:talk
4706:Gitz
4702:here
4698:here
4684:here
4680:here
4661:talk
4647:talk
4622:talk
4604:talk
4590:talk
4576:talk
4559:talk
4544:talk
4531:Zero
4505:talk
4490:talk
4471:talk
4456:talk
4442:talk
4428:talk
4413:talk
4399:talk
4384:Zero
4358:talk
4281:talk
4266:talk
4246:talk
4228:talk
4210:talk
4175:talk
4147:talk
4126:talk
4104:talk
4070:talk
4034:talk
4014:talk
3995:talk
3977:talk
3962:talk
3948:talk
3933:talk
3914:talk
3898:talk
3865:talk
3813:i.e.
3800:by "
3786:Zero
3754:As @
3692:If @
3665:talk
3648:talk
3632:talk
3601:talk
3583:talk
3566:talk
3556:See
3546:talk
3521:talk
3490:talk
3466:talk
3442:talk
3410:talk
3382:talk
3363:talk
3312:talk
3285:talk
3266:talk
3223:talk
3139:talk
3114:talk
3032:meta
3004:Link
2944:meta
2857:is:
2755:talk
2739:talk
2638:talk
2610:talk
2476:for
2474:RFCs
239:Spam
108:Bots
96:Main
14503:» °
14483:LCU
14262:» °
14242:LCU
14232:Be
14206:» °
14186:LCU
14118:doi
13990:» °
13970:LCU
13958:BLP
13886:» °
13866:LCU
13830:"
13772:» °
13752:LCU
13750:--
13711:.
13680:» °
13660:LCU
13460:Rjj
13426:Rjj
13388:» °
13368:LCU
13284:Rjj
13138:» °
13118:LCU
12982:In
12925:» °
12905:LCU
12634:» °
12614:LCU
12581:» °
12561:LCU
12549:RFC
12141:» °
12121:LCU
12072:» °
12052:LCU
11884:by
11804:» °
11784:LCU
11655:» °
11635:LCU
11624:466
11559:is
11421:TFD
11327:TFD
11303:» °
11283:LCU
11257:466
11198:» °
11178:LCU
11148:466
11082:466
10894:TFD
10828:466
10712:TFD
10698:466
10671:TFD
10647:466
10606:466
10476:or
10426:TFD
10181:» °
10161:LCU
9884:TFD
9793:466
9765:BBC
9744:of.
9737:and
9679:466
9565:466
9387:466
9293:466
9255:466
9154:466
9010:466
8899:466
8836:TFD
8826:466
8780:466
8681:466
8618:TFD
8572:TFD
8527:466
8431:TFD
8396:TFD
8331:TFD
8299:TFD
8233:466
8153:466
8092:» °
8072:LCU
8002:466
7897:» °
7877:LCU
7860:» °
7840:LCU
7746:» °
7726:LCU
7517:of
7205:hed
7202:nis
7199:Tar
7177:» °
7157:LCU
7089:» °
7069:LCU
6852:DEI
6810:» °
6790:LCU
6505:\\
6189:» °
6169:LCU
6155:» °
6135:LCU
6107:» °
6087:LCU
5952:,,
5520:» °
5500:LCU
5271:) (
5189:on
5153:lot
5133:TFD
5018:Yes
4997:Yes
4928:» °
4908:LCU
4893:» °
4873:LCU
4843:) (
4820:) (
4735:not
4712:) (
4674:.
4118:the
3833:not
3500:not
3378:3df
3307:Bri
3196:» °
3176:LCU
3000:RSN
2767:Toa
2712:» °
2692:LCU
2671:» °
2651:LCU
2649:--
2426:451
2422:450
2418:449
2414:448
2410:447
2406:446
2402:445
2398:444
2394:443
2390:442
2386:441
2382:440
2378:439
2374:438
2370:437
2366:436
2362:435
2358:434
2354:433
2350:432
2346:431
2342:430
2338:429
2334:428
2330:427
2326:426
2322:425
2318:424
2314:423
2310:422
2306:421
2302:420
2298:419
2294:418
2290:417
2286:416
2282:415
2278:414
2274:413
2270:412
2266:411
2262:410
2258:409
2254:408
2250:407
2246:406
2242:405
2238:404
2234:403
2230:402
2226:401
2222:400
2218:399
2214:398
2210:397
2206:396
2202:395
2198:394
2194:393
2190:392
2186:391
2182:390
2178:389
2174:388
2170:387
2166:386
2162:385
2158:384
2154:383
2150:382
2146:381
2142:380
2138:379
2134:378
2130:377
2126:376
2122:375
2118:374
2114:373
2110:372
2106:371
2102:370
2098:369
2094:368
2090:367
2086:366
2082:365
2078:364
2074:363
2070:362
2066:361
2062:360
2058:359
2054:358
2050:357
2046:356
2042:355
2038:354
2034:353
2030:352
2026:351
2022:350
2018:349
2014:348
2010:347
2006:346
2002:345
1998:344
1994:343
1990:342
1986:341
1982:340
1978:339
1974:338
1970:337
1966:336
1962:335
1958:334
1954:333
1950:332
1946:331
1942:330
1938:329
1934:328
1930:327
1926:326
1922:325
1918:324
1914:323
1910:322
1906:321
1902:320
1898:319
1894:318
1890:317
1886:316
1882:315
1878:314
1874:313
1870:312
1866:311
1862:310
1858:309
1854:308
1850:307
1846:306
1842:305
1838:304
1834:303
1830:302
1826:301
1822:300
1818:299
1814:298
1810:297
1806:296
1802:295
1798:294
1794:293
1790:292
1786:291
1782:290
1778:289
1774:288
1770:287
1766:286
1762:285
1758:284
1754:283
1750:282
1746:281
1742:280
1738:279
1734:278
1730:277
1726:276
1722:275
1718:274
1714:273
1710:272
1706:271
1702:270
1698:269
1694:268
1690:267
1686:266
1682:265
1678:264
1674:263
1670:262
1666:261
1662:260
1658:259
1654:258
1650:257
1646:256
1642:255
1638:254
1634:253
1630:252
1626:251
1622:250
1618:249
1614:248
1610:247
1606:246
1602:245
1598:244
1594:243
1590:242
1586:241
1582:240
1578:239
1574:238
1570:237
1566:236
1562:235
1558:234
1554:233
1550:232
1546:231
1542:230
1538:229
1534:228
1530:227
1526:226
1522:225
1518:224
1514:223
1510:222
1506:221
1502:220
1498:219
1494:218
1490:217
1486:216
1482:215
1478:214
1474:213
1470:212
1466:211
1462:210
1458:209
1454:208
1450:207
1446:206
1442:205
1438:204
1434:203
1430:202
1426:201
1422:200
1418:199
1414:198
1410:197
1406:196
1402:195
1398:194
1394:193
1390:192
1386:191
1382:190
1378:189
1374:188
1370:187
1366:186
1362:185
1358:184
1354:183
1350:182
1346:181
1342:180
1338:179
1334:178
1330:177
1326:176
1322:175
1318:174
1314:173
1310:172
1306:171
1302:170
1298:169
1294:168
1290:167
1286:166
1282:165
1278:164
1274:163
1270:162
1266:161
1262:160
1258:159
1254:158
1250:157
1246:156
1242:155
1238:154
1234:153
1230:152
1226:151
1222:150
1218:149
1214:148
1210:147
1206:146
1202:145
1198:144
1194:143
1190:142
1186:141
1182:140
1178:139
1174:138
1170:137
1166:136
1162:135
1158:134
1154:133
1150:132
1146:131
1142:130
1138:129
1134:128
1130:127
1126:126
1122:125
1118:124
1114:123
1110:122
1106:121
1102:120
1098:119
1094:118
1090:117
1086:116
1082:115
1078:114
1074:113
1070:112
1066:111
1062:110
1058:109
1054:108
1050:107
1046:106
1042:105
1038:104
1034:103
1030:102
1026:101
1022:100
612:by
525:WMF
312:XfD
148:VRT
14522::
14505:ât
14468:)
14395:.
14366:)
14358:.
14264:ât
14226:)
14208:ât
14173:)
14159:)
14136:)
14112:.
14078:.
14071:.
14067:,
14052:)
14010:)
13992:ât
13950:)
13935:)
13888:ât
13858:)
13840:)
13774:ât
13682:ât
13652:)
13626:,
13598:,
13581:)
13550:)
13531:)
13517:)
13495:)
13481:)
13467:)
13457:"
13447:)
13433:)
13409:)
13390:ât
13359:)
13345:)
13331:)
13311:)
13307:âą
13291:)
13264:.
13240:.
13140:ât
13110:)
13095:)
12967:)
12952:)
12927:ât
12893:)
12867:)
12845:)
12841:âą
12826:)
12739:)
12693:)
12673:,
12669:,
12636:ât
12605:)
12583:ât
12541:)
12526:)
12505:)
12491:)
12466:)
12431:.
12409:)
12374:)
12339:)
12243:đ
12221:)
12165:)
12143:ât
12074:ât
12038:đ
11992::
11967:đ
11940:)
11874:)
11860:)
11844:)
11825:)
11806:ât
11775:)
11739:)
11725:)
11709:)
11657:ât
11620:JN
11553:).
11525:)
11503:)
11473:)
11459:)
11442:)
11427:)
11409:)
11394:)
11371:)
11355:/
11333:)
11305:ât
11274:)
11253:JN
11237:)
11223:)
11200:ât
11144:JN
11121:)
11106:)
11078:JN
11067:,
11033:,
10981:,
10944:)
10929:)
10900:)
10867:)
10852:)
10824:JN
10798:)
10784:)
10765:)
10757:.
10748:)
10732:đ
10718:)
10694:JN
10677:)
10643:JN
10622:)
10602:JN
10585:)
10568:)
10552:)
10531:)
10504:)
10487:đ
10465:)
10450:)
10432:)
10400:)
10385:)
10368:)
10345:)
10328:)
10310:)
10271:)
10240:)
10202:)
10183:ât
10147:)
10130:)
10115:)
10099:,
10087:)
10073:)
10055:)
10035:đ
10021:)
9992:)
9976:)
9961:)
9921:đ
9907:)
9890:)
9872:)
9852:đ
9838:)
9824:)
9789:JN
9727:đ
9700:)
9675:JN
9655:)
9642::
9623:)
9604:)
9581:đ
9561:JN
9542::
9531::
9514:)
9496:)
9482:)
9468:)
9445:)
9430:)
9406:)
9383:JN
9376:--
9323:)
9289:JN
9251:JN
9244:.
9200:)
9184:đ
9150:JN
9137::
9103:)
9088:)
9036:)
9032:·
9006:JN
8975:,
8971::
8950:)
8931:)
8915:)
8895:JN
8881:)
8873:?
8842:)
8822:JN
8800:)
8776:JN
8677:JN
8606:)
8578:)
8562:)
8547:)
8523:JN
8488:)
8437:)
8416:)
8402:)
8373:)
8358:)
8337:)
8320:)
8305:)
8284:)
8265:)
8250:)
8229:JN
8222:--
8149:JN
8094:ât
8064:)
8039:)
8024:)
7998:JN
7975:,
7942:,
7932:,
7899:ât
7862:ât
7789:)
7771:)
7748:ât
7664:.
7645:)
7521:?
7436:)
7422:)
7410:.
7400:)
7381:)
7364:)
7346:)
7318:)
7273:do
7233:)
7179:ât
7144:)
7110:)
7091:ât
7061:)
7046:)
7028:)
6997:)
6955:)
6927:)
6912:)
6893:)
6869:)
6830:)
6812:ât
6773:)
6728:,
6724:,
6720:,
6704:)
6678:)
6646:)
6632:)
6612:)
6587:)
6573:)
6519:)
6473:)
6455:)
6441:)
6389:)
6355:)
6340:)
6321:)
6307:)
6281:)
6263:)
6245:)
6231:)
6209:)
6191:ât
6157:ât
6127:)
6109:ât
6067:)
6049:)
6019:)
6005:)
5990:)
5966:)
5958:.
5955:,
5949:,
5946:,
5937:)
5929:.
5920:)
5912:.
5901:)
5887:)
5872:)
5848:)
5844:/
5830:)
5816:)
5812:/
5798:)
5790:.
5780:)
5765:)
5761:/
5734:)
5718:)
5703:)
5683:)
5644:.
5607:|
5603:|
5599:|
5595:|
5590:|
5586:|
5581:|
5577:|
5557:)
5541:)
5522:ât
5491:)
5471:)
5439:)
5424:)
5405:)
5391:)
5374:)
5359:)
5351:.
5336:)
5315:)
5295:đ
5284:.
5275:)
5238:.
5197::
5179:)
5164:)
5151:A
5139:)
5129:No
5118:)
5091:No
5074:No
5067:)
5032::
5011:)
4990:)
4970:)
4930:ât
4895:ât
4847:)
4824:)
4796:)
4782:)
4768:)
4753:)
4716:)
4663:)
4649:)
4624:)
4606:)
4592:)
4578:)
4561:)
4546:)
4507:)
4492:)
4473:)
4458:)
4444:)
4430:)
4415:)
4401:)
4360:)
4283:)
4268:)
4248:)
4230:)
4212:)
4177:)
4149:)
4128:)
4106:)
4072:)
4036:)
4016:)
3997:)
3979:)
3964:)
3950:)
3935:)
3916:)
3900:)
3867:)
3794:*(
3725::
3667:)
3650:)
3634:)
3613::
3603:)
3585:)
3568:)
3548:)
3523:)
3492:)
3468:)
3444:)
3384:)
3365:)
3343:)
3340:cÌ
3329:03
3314:)
3296::
3287:)
3268:)
3229:)
3225:âą
3198:ât
3141:)
3120:)
3089:)
3086:cÌ
3075:03
3058:,
3038:âą
3030:âą
3024:de
3022:-
3020:fr
3018:-
3016:en
3006:,
2998:-
2994:-
2986:-
2982:-
2976:gs
2974:âą
2970:âą
2966:âą
2962:-
2958:-
2954:-
2952:fr
2950:-
2948:de
2946:-
2942:-
2937:en
2926:)
2923:cÌ
2912:03
2757:)
2714:ât
2673:ât
2640:)
2424:,
2416:,
2412:,
2408:,
2404:,
2400:,
2396:,
2392:,
2388:,
2384:,
2376:,
2372:,
2368:,
2364:,
2360:,
2356:,
2352:,
2348:,
2344:,
2336:,
2332:,
2328:,
2324:,
2320:,
2316:,
2312:,
2308:,
2304:,
2296:,
2292:,
2288:,
2284:,
2280:,
2276:,
2272:,
2268:,
2264:,
2256:,
2252:,
2248:,
2244:,
2240:,
2236:,
2232:,
2228:,
2224:,
2216:,
2212:,
2208:,
2204:,
2200:,
2196:,
2192:,
2188:,
2184:,
2176:,
2172:,
2168:,
2164:,
2160:,
2156:,
2152:,
2148:,
2144:,
2136:,
2132:,
2128:,
2124:,
2120:,
2116:,
2112:,
2108:,
2104:,
2096:,
2092:,
2088:,
2084:,
2080:,
2076:,
2072:,
2068:,
2064:,
2056:,
2052:,
2048:,
2044:,
2040:,
2036:,
2032:,
2028:,
2024:,
2016:,
2012:,
2008:,
2004:,
2000:,
1996:,
1992:,
1988:,
1984:,
1976:,
1972:,
1968:,
1964:,
1960:,
1956:,
1952:,
1948:,
1944:,
1936:,
1932:,
1928:,
1924:,
1920:,
1916:,
1912:,
1908:,
1904:,
1896:,
1892:,
1888:,
1884:,
1880:,
1876:,
1872:,
1868:,
1864:,
1856:,
1852:,
1848:,
1844:,
1840:,
1836:,
1832:,
1828:,
1824:,
1816:,
1812:,
1808:,
1804:,
1800:,
1796:,
1792:,
1788:,
1784:,
1776:,
1772:,
1768:,
1764:,
1760:,
1756:,
1752:,
1748:,
1744:,
1736:,
1732:,
1728:,
1724:,
1720:,
1716:,
1712:,
1708:,
1704:,
1696:,
1692:,
1688:,
1684:,
1680:,
1676:,
1672:,
1668:,
1664:,
1656:,
1652:,
1648:,
1644:,
1640:,
1636:,
1632:,
1628:,
1624:,
1616:,
1612:,
1608:,
1604:,
1600:,
1596:,
1592:,
1588:,
1584:,
1576:,
1572:,
1568:,
1564:,
1560:,
1556:,
1552:,
1548:,
1544:,
1536:,
1532:,
1528:,
1524:,
1520:,
1516:,
1512:,
1508:,
1504:,
1496:,
1492:,
1488:,
1484:,
1480:,
1476:,
1472:,
1468:,
1464:,
1456:,
1452:,
1448:,
1444:,
1440:,
1436:,
1432:,
1428:,
1424:,
1416:,
1412:,
1408:,
1404:,
1400:,
1396:,
1392:,
1388:,
1384:,
1376:,
1372:,
1368:,
1364:,
1360:,
1356:,
1352:,
1348:,
1344:,
1336:,
1332:,
1328:,
1324:,
1320:,
1316:,
1312:,
1308:,
1304:,
1296:,
1292:,
1288:,
1284:,
1280:,
1276:,
1272:,
1268:,
1264:,
1256:,
1252:,
1248:,
1244:,
1240:,
1236:,
1232:,
1228:,
1224:,
1216:,
1212:,
1208:,
1204:,
1200:,
1196:,
1192:,
1188:,
1184:,
1176:,
1172:,
1168:,
1164:,
1160:,
1156:,
1152:,
1148:,
1144:,
1136:,
1132:,
1128:,
1124:,
1120:,
1116:,
1112:,
1108:,
1104:,
1096:,
1092:,
1088:,
1084:,
1080:,
1076:,
1072:,
1068:,
1064:,
1056:,
1052:,
1048:,
1044:,
1040:,
1036:,
1032:,
1028:,
1024:,
1018:99
1016:,
1014:98
1012:,
1010:97
1008:,
1006:96
1004:,
1002:95
1000:,
998:94
996:,
994:93
992:,
990:92
988:,
986:91
984:,
982:90
978:89
976:,
974:88
972:,
970:87
968:,
966:86
964:,
962:85
960:,
958:84
956:,
954:83
952:,
950:82
948:,
946:81
944:,
942:80
938:79
936:,
934:78
932:,
930:77
928:,
926:76
924:,
922:75
920:,
918:74
916:,
914:73
912:,
910:72
908:,
906:71
904:,
902:70
898:69
896:,
894:68
892:,
890:67
888:,
886:66
884:,
882:65
880:,
878:64
876:,
874:63
872:,
870:62
868:,
866:61
864:,
862:60
858:59
856:,
854:58
852:,
850:57
848:,
846:56
844:,
842:55
840:,
838:54
836:,
834:53
832:,
830:52
828:,
826:51
824:,
822:50
818:49
816:,
814:48
812:,
810:47
808:,
806:46
804:,
802:45
800:,
798:44
796:,
794:43
792:,
790:42
788:,
786:41
784:,
782:40
778:39
776:,
774:38
772:,
770:37
768:,
766:36
764:,
762:35
760:,
758:34
756:,
754:33
752:,
750:32
748:,
746:31
744:,
742:30
738:29
736:,
734:28
732:,
730:27
728:,
726:26
724:,
722:25
720:,
718:24
716:,
714:23
712:,
710:22
708:,
706:21
704:,
702:20
698:19
696:,
694:18
692:,
690:17
688:,
686:16
684:,
682:15
680:,
678:14
676:,
674:13
672:,
670:12
668:,
666:11
664:,
662:10
656:,
652:,
648:,
644:,
640:,
636:,
632:,
628:,
624:,
14507:°
14501:@
14499:«
14491:D
14487:A
14464:(
14362:(
14266:°
14260:@
14258:«
14250:D
14246:A
14222:(
14210:°
14204:@
14202:«
14194:D
14190:A
14169:(
14155:(
14132:(
14124:.
14120::
14114:1
14048:(
14006:(
13994:°
13988:@
13986:«
13978:D
13974:A
13946:(
13931:(
13915:)
13890:°
13884:@
13882:«
13874:D
13870:A
13854:(
13836:(
13801:"
13776:°
13770:@
13768:«
13760:D
13756:A
13684:°
13678:@
13676:«
13668:D
13664:A
13648:(
13577:(
13546:(
13527:(
13513:(
13491:(
13477:(
13463:(
13453:"
13443:(
13429:(
13421::
13417:@
13405:(
13392:°
13386:@
13384:«
13376:D
13372:A
13355:(
13341:(
13327:(
13309:c
13305:t
13303:(
13287:(
13164:.
13142:°
13136:@
13134:«
13126:D
13122:A
13106:(
13093:t
13091:(
13086:M
13066:C
13033:C
12963:(
12948:(
12929:°
12923:@
12921:«
12913:D
12909:A
12889:(
12863:(
12856::
12852:@
12843:c
12839:t
12837:(
12822:(
12813:.
12802::
12790:.
12779::
12750::
12746:@
12735:(
12715:(
12689:(
12638:°
12632:@
12630:«
12622:D
12618:A
12601:(
12593:@
12585:°
12579:@
12577:«
12569:D
12565:A
12537:(
12522:(
12514:@
12501:(
12487:(
12462:/
12458:(
12405:(
12370:(
12335:(
12299:)
12295:(
12284:)
12280:(
12217:(
12182::
12174:@
12161:(
12145:°
12139:@
12137:«
12129:D
12125:A
12076:°
12070:@
12068:«
12060:D
12056:A
11936:(
11895:)
11891:(
11870:(
11856:(
11840:(
11821:(
11808:°
11802:@
11800:«
11792:D
11788:A
11771:(
11735:(
11721:(
11705:(
11659:°
11653:@
11651:«
11643:D
11639:A
11521:(
11499:(
11469:(
11455:(
11438:(
11423:(
11405:(
11390:(
11367:(
11329:(
11307:°
11301:@
11299:«
11291:D
11287:A
11270:(
11233:(
11219:(
11202:°
11196:@
11194:«
11186:D
11182:A
11117:(
11102:(
10940:(
10925:(
10896:(
10888:.
10863:(
10848:(
10794:(
10780:(
10761:(
10744:(
10714:(
10673:(
10618:(
10581:(
10564:(
10548:(
10527:(
10500:(
10461:(
10446:(
10428:(
10396:(
10381:(
10364:(
10341:(
10324:(
10306:(
10267:(
10236:(
10198:(
10185:°
10179:@
10177:«
10169:D
10165:A
10143:(
10126:(
10111:(
10083:(
10069:(
10051:(
10017:(
9988:(
9972:(
9957:(
9903:(
9886:(
9868:(
9834:(
9820:(
9773:.
9767:,
9761:,
9696:(
9651:(
9619:(
9600:(
9510:(
9492:(
9478:(
9464:(
9441:(
9426:(
9402:(
9319:(
9273:@
9196:(
9099:(
9084:(
9034:c
9030:t
8946:(
8927:(
8911:(
8877:(
8838:(
8796:(
8689:@
8612:@
8602:(
8592:.
8574:(
8558:(
8543:(
8484:(
8433:(
8412:(
8398:(
8369:(
8354:(
8333:(
8316:(
8301:(
8280:(
8261:(
8246:(
8096:°
8090:@
8088:«
8080:D
8076:A
8060:(
8035:(
8020:/
8016:(
7901:°
7895:@
7893:«
7885:D
7881:A
7864:°
7858:@
7856:«
7848:D
7844:A
7817:)
7811:(
7785:(
7767:(
7750:°
7744:@
7742:«
7734:D
7730:A
7702:)
7696:(
7682::
7678:@
7674::
7670:@
7658::
7654:@
7641:(
7630:)
7624:(
7585:)
7579:(
7480:.
7432:(
7418:/
7414:(
7396:(
7377:(
7360:/
7356:(
7342:(
7335:.
7329:.
7314:/
7310:(
7229:(
7181:°
7175:@
7173:«
7165:D
7161:A
7140:(
7106:(
7093:°
7087:@
7085:«
7077:D
7073:A
7057:(
7042:/
7038:(
7024:(
6993:(
6951:(
6923:(
6908:/
6904:(
6889:(
6865:(
6826:(
6814:°
6808:@
6806:«
6798:D
6794:A
6769:(
6734:D
6730:A
6700:(
6674:(
6642:(
6628:(
6608:(
6601:.
6583:(
6569:(
6515:(
6469:(
6451:(
6437:(
6433:â
6418:'
6385:(
6351:(
6336:/
6332:(
6317:(
6303:/
6299:(
6277:(
6259:/
6255:(
6241:(
6227:/
6223:(
6205:(
6193:°
6187:@
6185:«
6177:D
6173:A
6159:°
6153:@
6151:«
6143:D
6139:A
6123:(
6111:°
6105:@
6103:«
6095:D
6091:A
6063:(
6045:/
6041:(
6015:(
6001:(
5986:(
5962:(
5933:(
5916:(
5897:(
5883:(
5868:/
5864:(
5840:(
5826:(
5808:(
5794:(
5776:(
5757:(
5730:(
5714:(
5699:/
5695:(
5679:(
5669:.
5655:.
5611:)
5573:(
5553:(
5537:(
5524:°
5518:@
5516:«
5508:D
5504:A
5487:(
5467:(
5435:(
5420:(
5401:(
5387:(
5370:(
5355:(
5332:(
5311:(
5267:(
5175:(
5160:(
5135:(
5114:(
5063:(
5007:(
4986:(
4966:(
4932:°
4926:@
4924:«
4916:D
4912:A
4897:°
4891:@
4889:«
4881:D
4877:A
4839:(
4816:(
4792:(
4778:(
4764:(
4749:(
4708:(
4659:(
4645:(
4620:(
4602:(
4588:(
4574:(
4557:(
4542:(
4503:(
4488:(
4469:(
4454:(
4440:(
4426:(
4411:(
4397:(
4356:(
4320:"
4315:"
4296:"
4279:(
4264:(
4244:(
4226:(
4208:(
4173:(
4145:(
4124:(
4102:(
4068:(
4032:(
4023:(
4012:(
3993:(
3975:(
3960:(
3946:(
3931:(
3912:(
3896:(
3873:@
3863:(
3741:(
3736:"
3728:"
3702::
3683:"
3663:(
3646:(
3630:(
3599:(
3581:(
3564:(
3544:(
3519:(
3488:(
3464:(
3440:(
3413:)
3407:(
3380:(
3361:(
3335:d
3332:(
3310:(
3302::
3298:@
3283:(
3264:(
3221:(
3200:°
3194:@
3192:«
3184:D
3180:A
3137:(
3116:/
3112:(
3081:d
3078:(
2918:d
2915:(
2903:â
2818:.
2753:(
2735:|
2716:°
2710:@
2708:«
2700:D
2696:A
2675:°
2669:@
2667:«
2659:D
2655:A
2636:(
2606:|
2555:.
2497:.
658:9
654:8
650:7
646:6
642:5
638:4
634:3
630:2
626:1
616:.
413:)
409:(
80:.
52:e
45:t
38:v
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.