:-) was for Steve.

As to where does it all end. Well, I think the answer to that lies in common sense. If a source is regularly wrong in its reporting then it should be doubted and double checked at all times. The editors of Wikipedia have a job to do and if they spend a large proportion of their time checking the Daily Mail sources, which should have been checked by the paper in the first place, then it makes sense for them to stop using it and save themselves a lot of work.

Hansard is false equivalence. They report what the MP says. Whether the MP is right or wrong is a matter for people to make up their own mind about but the fact remains that the MP said it.

DtG