On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 00:38:50 +0000, Grimly Curmudgeon
wrote:

Yes, well; in a couple of areas where I have definite knowledge of
things that happened, it's bloody wrong. I tried correcting them a
couple of times, but it always got reverted by some effing know-all.

Problem is, for something on Wikipedia to be considered 'true' it must
be supported by a reliable source - i.e. one of those newspapers or
proper journalists, who (a) don't report everything, and (b) don't
always get it right when they do.

It is a key failing (although possibly unavaoidable) in an otherwise
worthwhile endeavour.
--