Not really. 1. I just checked Epstein's Wikipedia entry-- it lists the very recent Drop Site News allegation of his and Wexner's ties to the Iran-Contra drug s

Not really. 1. I just checked Epstein's Wikipedia entry-- it lists the very recent Drop Site News allegation of his and Wexner's ties to the Iran-Contra drug smuggling operation. And that in a whole section on the topic of intelligence ties going back years. The links covered in that Drop Site story were left out of a recent NYT article that covered a lot of the same period of Epstein's life. (I also haven't seen that Drop Site News story picked up by any of the other mainstream news sites or shows.) NYT is prominently listed as a reliable source, Drop Site News isn't. Yet I can still read a nice summary of that Drop Site Story on Wikipedia. 2. Also checked the entry on Bin Laden killing. It not only includes a substantial summary of Hersh's account that was widely criticized by both other journalists and the Obama White House, but that Hersh story also has its own entry. > You can only trust wikipedia as much as you can trust the news media. I'd reword this to say if you can trust that at least one reputable journalist has covered a given subject, a Wikipedian has most likely already included a summary in the relevant article for you. Edit: clarification