{{Notice|RfC closure review request at [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard#RfC_closure_review_request_at_Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#RFC:_The_Telegraph_on_trans_issues|administrators' noticeboard]] is being discussed}}
{{archive top|In this discussion, the community once again considers whether the Daily Telegraph, a UK Newspaper, is really "Generally reliable" on trans issues. The Daily Telegraph is a [[Newspaper of Record]], and to decide that it's unreliable on a topic is quite a big step for Wikipedia. The discussion has attracted a great deal of interest and comment, some of it very passionate indeed.{{pb}}Editors on both sides agree that the Telegraph is biased on this matter. It is a willing warrior in the war on wokery. It gives platform to the most flagrantly gender-critical tracts by anti-woke activists. But of course, most sources are biased in some way. Our task as encyclopaedists is to construct neutral articles from biased sources. The point at issue in this discussion is where "bias" ends and "unreliability" begins.{{pb}}The Telegraph's unashamed embrace of the widely-debunked [[Litter boxes in schools hoax]] is discussed at great length, and it's noted that the Telegraph's misrepresentations about this remain unretracted. This persuades some editors into the "Generally unreliable" column, but leaves others distinctly unimpressed.{{pb}}We label a source as "generally reliable" when there's widespread consensus that the source can be trusted to publish fact and retract error. On trans issues, Wikipedians simply do not have this level of confidence in the Daily Telegraph. We must, therefore, qualify our WP:RSP entry saying that the Daily Telegraph is generally reliable. We must say instead that the Daily Telegraph is generally reliable, except as regards trans issues and gender-critical views, where the Daily Telegraph's reliability is disputed. I leave it to others to make the consequent edits.{{pb}}There is discussion of a moratorium on repeating the questions raised in this RfC. I leave that discussion un-resolved, not least because a moratorium is procedurally unfeasible. If there were a moratorium, there would be no route to challenge this close.{{pb}}I hope that this helps and is sufficient to fully resolve the dispute. Questions, comments, and criticism of this close is welcome and should be directed to my talk page in the first instance. You can also challenge the close, in which case you can raise your challenge on my talk page but you're also welcome to proceed directly to the Administrator's Noticeboard if you prefer. ''Nobody'' should continue the discussion on this page, though.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 10:53, 7 July 2024 (UTC){{pb}}(Later) Long though this close was, I have been asked to expand it even further, which I have done [[User:S Marshall/Daily Telegraph close expansion|here]].|RELIABILITY DISPUTED}}
What is the reliability of the Telegraph on trans issues?
