Third he claims that the media took a narrow survey and implied broad
implications for quality with high-level coverage. This is somewhat
true, and, well, what mainstream media does. And what Carr did with
his first claim. But the articles did link to the actual study.
Ross is fact checking Carr who is fact checking Wikipedia in what appears to be a drawn out mission to discredit it as a reference source. Okay Nick, we get it… you don’t like Wikipedia, think it’s flawed. Got it, move along.
Two things bothered me about the Carr post, first it would have been better in the discussion pages that are attached to every Wikipedia entry, and secondly, he didn’t provide any links to the source material he is quoting.