Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia, has now, for articles on conflict and recent history at least, been filed in my mental waste-paper basket. The policies on the site for Neutral Point of View (NPOV) editing, which are vital have come to mean nothing in circumstances where politically motivated writers and editors are prepared to establish their own points of view on topical issues. As a result, contentious historical events now have more than an air of whitewash to them.
Discussions on articles have become like nothing so much as debating competitions with gangs of politically motivated mutants on hand to tribally gerrymander the argument process; outrageously, settled precedent outweighs legal or logical fact, creating a strange world divorced from reality, where the biggest activist group can triumph through force of will and numbers. Names of cities are changed on a whim, and petty wars are waged to amend history. This is surely no way to create a lasting information source.
Want to see how bad it is?
Check out this account of a discussion on whether to keep a list of people killed in the outrageous incidents of Bloody Sunday 1972. For the record, I have no issue with maintaining the list, on the basis that it was a notable incident, and the deaths appear to be as a result of government action in a rule-of-law state. That enough is grounds for maintenance of a list; add to that the fact that the list is already in the Public Domain and not disputed, and the whole grounds for the argument are ridiculous.
You may also wish to check out articles and discussions on The Iranian Seizure of British Military Personnel