Given that Wikipedia already exists, all I can think of is a Metapedia - something that trawls published sources for salient facts and notes where they all agree or where there is disagreement, with links to the original sources.
Failing that, a way of distinguishing fact from opinion (anything answering the question 'why' and not related to a hard science counts as opinion), so you could have the 'Metro' version of "$event happened on $date and Xpeople died. $quote1, $quote2", and the extended article which suggests reasons and would be the contentious part ('Evening Standard' version)
no subject
Date: 2006-09-19 04:48 pm (UTC)Failing that, a way of distinguishing fact from opinion (anything answering the question 'why' and not related to a hard science counts as opinion), so you could have the 'Metro' version of "$event happened on $date and Xpeople died. $quote1, $quote2", and the extended article which suggests reasons and would be the contentious part ('Evening Standard' version)