[m_dupont]

I think there is some room for debate here about the political bias of wikipedia, and there is some evidence to suggest a left wing bias.

However this article is pretty venomous and the author doesn't even make an attempt at masking their disdain for the other side. It's not written in good faith.

I'd prefer if someone shared a more cool-headed article on the subject

[jauntywundrkind]

This article shows various people working with some obviously quite bad people doing bad things in extremely bad faith.

I don't think there's any cause to be polite or graceful, to people being so vulgarly hostile, especially to something so amazing & good.

[glonq]

Yeah, I do see where you're coming from. But just like with traditional media, Wikipedia as a "knowledge commons" maybe requires a slight left bias to guard against entrenched power and to raise awareness of marginalized perspectives.

As long as that's done in a way that protects knowledge integrity and relies on reliable sources and ethical review, I think I'm okay with that.

Also keep in mind that the age range of Wikipedia contributors skews much younger than the US population so yeah for boomers and the boomer-minded it's often gonna seem too progressive.