>most Wikipedia source nazis seem to insist on a major mainstream publication like the NYT That is another basic wikipedia policy. Some sources are more reliab

>most Wikipedia source nazis seem to insist on a major mainstream publication like the NYT That is another basic wikipedia policy. Some sources are more reliable than others. Most people would agree that NYT is more reliable than the Drumheller Mail. >It's like insisting there is no astroturfing on HN, reddit, or Facebook I didn't say it doesn't happen. I'm saying it's not a significant issue, because there are more editors than PR people on each page. Can you give a single instance of this being a problem on a current wikipedia page? I've already asked DanBC for specific instances of problems, and he hasn't managed to come up with anything either. There are lots of people complaining about wikipedia, but very few if any instances of actual problems.