Although Foucault is pretty much required reading for anyone in the humanities or social sciences, he is often noted as having an idiosyncratic reading of history. So, Askhistorians, I request your opinions on the matter. Where does Foucault stray from the historical truth and to what extent he can be considered reliable?
What's important about Foucault is that he helps redefine "historical truth"; so, asking if he strays from it is sort of missing the point.
I wrote a long post of Foucault's influence on historiography here.
What do you mean by history?
Do yo mean like specific facts or events Foucault got wrong? He may have gotten the dates of some things wrong, but it's not really the thrust of his argument or his expertise. He's more a theorist.
Are you instead asking about his philosophy, (how, say in his early work History of Sexuality his account of how power has operated historically is distinguishable from Marxism)?