Instapundit points to Dinocrat's claim that the New York Times plagiarized an inaccurate Wikipedia article on the Margrave virus.
However....
The line is not present in a revision dated 12:01, 9 Apr 2005. It first appears in a revision dated 15:28, 9 Apr 2005. The line was added by an anonymous person who also added an article on the oldest known object on Earth and added recent news on homosexual Republican consultant Arthur Finkelstein to an article on gay rights.
It is true that the New York Times should be rebuked for any inaccurate information its article may contain. However, it is clear that the right wing blogosphere is itching to jump all over this as another case of the liberal media using inaccurate documents once again. Instead, we have a case of Wikipedia once again plagiarizing a newspaper article.
Hmmm...maybe I should have waited until Powerline got their mitts on this.
UPDATE: As I forgot to point out and a commenter noted, the new York Times itself was cited in the Wikipedia article.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home