QUOTE(Somey @ Sun 31st July 2011, 4:36pm)
Michael, did you actually read the article for comprehension, or did you merely scan it for juicy facts you could use in the Wikipedia article in question?
The mere fact that two sides of a dispute are presented in a "news article" does not make the information in that article "reliable." What you have there is claim and counter-claim - it's not much different than "how long have you been beating your wife" or "he stole my bike/no I didn't."
So no, that's not satisfactory. But then again, neither is Wikipedia in general, so I guess you'll get away with it.
The Wikipedia article now basically includes all the information the Daily Dot article has to offer. I also incorporated some information into the "Content" section and the "EncyclopediaDramatica.ch" section. Not all of this material is "claim and counterclaim". Did I leave out anything significant? I'm here for article's benefit.
This post has been edited by Michaeldsuarez: