Wikimedia Foundation

In a recent interview, Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales was confronted about the site claiming Israel committed genocide in Gaza. Wales rejected this as biased and requested changes at the “Gaza genocide” article’s discussion page. Editors attacked Wales with some accusing him of ties to Israel or suggesting sanctions, such as removing his “founder” flag. Some sought action regarding a neutrality working group set up by the site’s owners, a working group he chairs.

Earlier this month, the Wikimedia Foundation that owns Wikipedia rejected candidates in community elections for its Board of Trustees, sparking a community revolt. One rejected candidate was Iraqi national Ravan Jaafar Al-Taie, who made numerous anti-Israeli posts. After community-elected board member Victoria Doronina publicly linked the posts to the rejection, Al-Taie filed a conduct complaint against Doronina, who later apologized and announced she was suspending most board activities until the end of the year.

Last week, a gunman who declared himself an “anti-contact non-offending” pedophile rushed the stage at WikiConference North America in New York City and threatened to kill himself in protest over the Wikipedia child protection policy, which bans self-identified pedophiles. A member of the site’s Arbitration Committee, often likened to a Supreme Court, claimed the gunman is Connor Weston, who was banned earlier this year under the aforementioned policy.

The House Oversight Committee submitted an information request to the Wikimedia Foundation that owns Wikipedia in August with a deadline of September 10 for providing requested documents, with which the Foundation has failed to comply with according to Jewish News Syndicate citing a press assistant for one Committee member. Republicans on the Committee are investigating bias, particularly anti-Israeli bias, at the online encyclopedia.

In an interview with Jan Jekielek of the Epoch Times that aired this week, Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger announced plans to circulate a letter of protest among prominent individuals and groups harmed by Wikipedia before sending to the Wikimedia Foundation that owns the site. He further suggested such a letter could be sent to U.S. government officials and other governments to press for reform at the online encyclopedia.

The Wikimedia Foundation, which owns Wikipedia, last week rejected two Board of Trustees candidates during its community elections allowing regular contributors to directly choose board representatives. Its purported rationale included one candidate’s involvement with a major community newsletter and another’s social media comments attacking Israel. The rejections provoked community outrage, including from former board members and staff. Petitions and statements opposing the decision, some blaming Israeli and United States government pressure, generally pledged to boycott the election.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) sent a letter Friday to Maryana Iskander, CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation which owns Wikipedia, requesting information about the site’s reported political bias. Cruz cited the ongoing purge of conservative media on the online encyclopedia and other bias concerns, following a viral interview commentator Tucker Carlson did with Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger last week where they discussed the site blacklisting conservative sources, including Breitbart.

Earlier this week, commentator Tucker Carlson’s podcast aired an interview with Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger where he discussed his criticism of the online encyclopedia and introduced his “nine theses” advocating reform. Describing the site as a “mixture of oligarchy and anarchy” during the interview, Sanger criticized many issues he identified with Wikipedia since his departure from the site.

Following the assassination of Turning Point USA co-founder Charlie Kirk, Wikipedia editors made malicious edits about him, even as his page was locked to inexperienced editors with former members of Wikipedia’s “Supreme Court” and co-founder Jimmy Wales monitoring Kirk’s page. This included mocking Kirk’s last words and accusing him of targeted harassment campaigns, the latter staying in the page’s introduction for days.

A discussion regarding the Wikipedia article on allegations Israel is committing genocide in the Gaza Strip was closed over the weekend in favor of stating the allegations as fact. The proposal received significant support from pro-Palestinian and socialist editors, but other editors noted a recent discussion had already ruled against claiming genocide as fact. 

A discussion last week on deleting the Wikipedia article “Destruction of Israel in Iranian policy” after Israel began its air campaign against Iran was closed by an admin Sunday with a decision to “merge” the page into one on Iran-Israel relations. The decision came despite a majority of editors being opposed to the page’s removal.

Shortly after Israel began its military operation targeting Iran’s nuclear program and its military, editors on Wikipedia proposed deleting the article “Destruction of Israel in Iranian policy” linked from the military operation page, as the Iranian policy is a key component of Israel’s justification of the operation. Discussion is bitterly divided between those advocating deletion of the page or merging it into other articles and those arguing for keeping the page.

The Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit that owns Wikipedia, introduced new account security requirements for users with certain advanced privileges on May 20 in response to a recent hacking incident that compromised over 35,000 accounts. However, the requirement was undone and its rollout delayed after the Foundation learned that it had failed to inform some impacted users of the new security steps.

The Foundation that owns Wikipedia is preparing to require two-factor authentication for users with significant privileges starting in late May.

Maryana Iskander, the CEO of the Wikimedia Foundation — the nonprofit that owns Wikipedia — is reportedly stepping down from her position. The revelation comes just two weeks after the foundation was accused of violating its 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status by allowing propaganda and misinformation from “foreign actors” to flourish on the platform. Iskander, meanwhile, insists her forthcoming departure has been in the works for some time.

The Wikimedia Foundation, owners of Wikipedia, formed a working group focused on neutrality policy at the end of March with site co-founder Jimmy Wales as chair. Its objective will be to study the neutrality policies in place on different-language Wikipedias and other Foundation-owned sites to develop a global standard. Although citing various left-wing concerns about neutrality, the Foundation omitted any reference to the site’s own leftist political bias.

After Acting U.S. Attorney for D.C. Ed Martin sent a letter last week to the foundation that owns Wikipedia raising questions regarding the online encyclopedia’s political bias, editors made repeated attacks against Martin on the site. Editors also attacked Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger and Elon Musk due to their criticism of the site’s left-wing bias.

Interim United States Attorney for the District of Columbia Ed Martin is accusing the Wikimedia Foundation — the nonprofit group that runs Wikipedia — of violating its 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status by allowing propaganda and misinformation from ‘foreign actors’ to flourish on the platform.

Larry Sanger, co-founder of Wikipedia, expressed his shock at recent statements made by the former CEO of its parent organization Wikimedia, Katherine Maher, who now serves as CEO of NPR.

The Wikipedia Arbitration Committee, likened to a “Supreme Court” for the site, suspended the privileges of member “Beeblebrox” for six months over claimed misconduct in the first such suspension in Wikipedia’s history. Among the alleged incidents, some concerned a now-former administrator with whom Beeblebrox had feuded. The same former administrator last month confessed to impersonating a Spanish indie singer and previously editing Wikipedia with an account banned for undisclosed paid editing, a common practice on the online encyclopedia.

A long-time Wikipedia editor for over a decade, Guy Macon, retired from the site late June after he was briefly banned for not using “preferred pronouns” when discussing a ban appeal by former site administrator Ashley Van Haeften. Macon used Van Haeften’s username “Fæ” instead of singular “they” due to grammatical objections. Van Haeften and Macon previously fought over the former’s agenda-driven editing. Though the ban was lifted on grounds Macon was sincerely trying to respect Van Haeften’s wishes, some administrators still argued it was valid, citing the “code of conduct” recently imposed by Wikipedia’s owners.

Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger published a blog post last week analyzing the site’s left-wing bias. Examining articles about Donald Trump’s impeachments, the Black Lives Matter protests and riots, Joe Biden’s scandals, and the 2020 election, Sanger argued Wikipedia’s coverage is so extremely left-wing that it constitutes propaganda. He partly blamed an ongoing purge of conservative news sources on Wikipedia which includes Breitbart News. Sanger warned these developments made Wikipedia “a kind of thought police” and “an opponent of vigorous democracy.”

Recent allegations by former staff at the Wikimedia Foundation, which owns Wikipedia, accusing management of bullying and other offenses including anti-union retaliation, have prompted other former staff to come forward. Aside from echoing claims about mistreatment of staff, one former staffer alleged departing employees often are pushed to sign non-disclosure agreements and questioned the practice in light of the allegations. She further alleged employees would sometimes be overworked and fired for then failing to perform.

A former staffer at the Wikimedia Foundation, which owns Wikipedia, recently published a statement accusing high-level Foundation managers of workplace bullying based on his autism. Earlier this month, other former staff came forward with similar allegations of mistreatment by Foundation management. Some alleged they were subject to retaliation after complaining of the treatment with one suggesting it was tied to his union organizing activities.

Twitter launched its Birdwatch feature earlier this year with media noting the similarities between the crowd-sourced fact-checking process and the open editing model of Wikipedia, a comparison Twitter touted in early demos. However, much like Wikipedia, the Birdwatch platform often serves as a way for users to push their political agenda. Both right and left have taken advantage, though Twitter promises tighter restrictions, which the platform’s history of bias suggests will tilt it towards the left.

Wikipedia celebrated its 20th anniversary on January 15, following a year of considerable controversy for the online encyclopedia. The site’s increasing leftward bias became more apparent in the preceding year with Wikipedia’s owners imposing a “code of conduct” advancing left-wing identity politics, editors actively pushing a Black Lives Matter agenda, disputes regarding its medical coverage, an ongoing purge of conservative media, and aiding the 2020 Presidential campaign of Joe Biden. Affiliated sites in other languages also saw controversy over widespread errors.

Big Tech has heavily relied on content from Wikipedia in recent years, particularly in the wake of concerns about “fake news” online. Last week, the Wikimedia Foundation, which owns Wikipedia, announced that it is launching Wikimedia Enterprise, a commercial service catering to major corporate clients. It aims to provide the service exclusively to corporations already using site content under its free license, specifically providing easier and more reliable access than under the current free system.

The Wikimedia Foundation, which owns Wikipedia, announced last week that its Board of Trustees has approved a new “code of conduct” for the site and its affiliated sites. Plans for a code of conduct had been announced last year and an early draft pushing left-wing identity politics submitted for public comment a few months later. Several clarifying changes were made following the comment period, with final changes after approval broadening the scope of restrictions on “intimidating” content.

A study published Tuesday in the Journal of Management Information Systems examined the gender bias of Wikipedia articles. Comparing Wikipedia’s treatment of 50 female Fortune 1000 CEOs to similar groups of male CEOs, the study found the men were 22 percent less likely to have articles on the site than female executives, and the women had generally higher-quality articles as well. The researchers concluded this demonstrates activist editors overcorrecting for the site’s gender bias, leading to a bias towards women and suggested similar overcorrection could arise in other groups.

Leading up to the 2020 Presidential election, Wikipedia editors worked tirelessly to swing articles towards Democratic nominee Joe Biden. This started with slanting articles on President Donald Trump’s impeachment where allegations against Biden figured strongly. It continued with editors pushing the Black Lives Matter agenda on which Biden sought to capitalize and sanitizing pages of his vice-presidential prospects, including Kamala Harris. Finally, editors sought to suppress revelations about Biden family corruption, aided by well-timed restrictions on conservative media.

Since Donald Trump’s surprise 2016 presidential election victory, Wikipedia editors have been gradually purging conservative media from the site claiming to fight “fake news” and leading to the recent suppression of the New York Post’s Biden corruption revelations. The Wikimedia Foundation, which owns the site, has leaned into these efforts to tout Wikipedia’s reliability, which has been echoed by mainstream media. This messaging followed a strategy recommended to the Wikimedia Foundation in 2016 by Minassian Media, a firm run by the Clinton Foundation’s Head of Communications.

Silicon Valley has repeatedly proclaimed that Wikipedia is the best way to deal with “fake news” on their platforms. Co-founder Jimmy Wales and the Wikimedia Foundation that owns the site have touted its sourcing policies in agreement and been amplified by establishment media. Yet just as Big Tech suppressed prominent conservative media following President Donald Trump’s election, most recently censoring New York Post revelations regarding alleged Biden family corruption, Wikipedia’s community of editors has done the same by slowly purging conservative outlets from use as sources.

In a piece for British magazine the Critic, American academics analyzed evidence of left-wing bias on Wikipedia. Noting research into Wikipedia’s left-wing bias and its increasing bans of conservative media, the authors point to a greater sign of bias: the enforcement of site policies on major political topics by administrators with special privileges on the site. They find in their analysis that editors favoring right-leaning views were six times more likely to be sanctioned than those favoring left-leaning views.

The World Health Organization and the Wikimedia Foundation, which owns Wikipedia, announced a collaboration last week responding to “misinformation” on the coronavirus pandemic. As part of the collaboration, the W.H.O. has released several “fact-check” graphics on a free license so they can be used on Wikipedia and other sites owned by the Foundation. The partnership prompted criticism from some Wikipedia editors due to the W.H.O.’s mishandling of the pandemic in its early stages in China.

In a decision last month by Wikipedia’s community, statements in “userboxes” on editor profile pages were no longer allowed if they expressed or implied opposition to gay marriage. Breitbart’s coverage of the decision prompted Christian media and organizations, as well as family groups, to condemn Wikipedia for censoring the views of traditional marriage supporters.

Wikipedia users are no longer allowed to include “userboxes” on their profile page that express opposition to gay marriage following a discussion where predominantly left-wing editors argued such a stance was “discriminatory” and against site policy. Most userboxes pre-dated a U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage and were used by hundreds of editors. This included one expressing a personal view favoring traditional marriage, but advocating for states to decide.