468

Larry Sanger, one of Wikipedia’s cofounders, was banned from editing the site indefinitely after other editors determined he was canvassing, or in other words, calling on his followers off platform in order to influence Wikipedia’s content.

Sanger has spent more than a decade criticizing Wikipedia for what he claims is an ideological, left-wing bias on a variety of topics, and on X has framed this recent ban as further proof of everything that’s wrong with Wikipedia. The New York Post took that bait and last night published an article with the headline “Left-leaning Wikipedia blocked founder from editing site—after he campaigned to make it more balanced.”

Wikipedia editors obviously reject that framing and say that Sanger was banned for wielding his followers to sway discussion and decision making on Wikipedia. The discussion that led to the decision to ban Sanger concluded with what an editor called a “clear consensus” to ban Sanger.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Bread@thelemmy.club 1 points 10 hours ago

It's a little sad that he's still messing with that site. It's been years since I've used it for anything. It's incomplete and heavily biased.

[-] ComradePenguin@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 hours ago

How is it biased? Biased towards truth? If you have proof of it lying or misrepresenting something, then you just have to prove it and I am sure they or you will be able to change it.

[-] Bread@thelemmy.club 1 points 2 hours ago

They will not let you change it. They gate keep who gets to edit things intensely.

[-] ComradePenguin@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 hours ago

For good reason, there is a lot of interest in implementing actual bias.

Israel/Palestine/Gaza is examples of this.

Do you have any examples of bias? Or wrong information?

[-] innermachine@lemmy.world 25 points 9 hours ago

Wikipedia is a great start point. You read the wiki, then check the references. Just like reading the news, you should never take one source at face value! Engage your ✨ CRITICAL THINKING ✨

[-] Bread@thelemmy.club 1 points 2 hours ago

Wikipedia is pointless. You can ask any AI your question and ask for sources. It's more reliable than wikipedia.

[-] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 4 points 1 hour ago

Not sure if troll or...

...ok, I'll bite. This is maybe the stupidest thing I've ever seen. You know that Wikipedia comprises one of the largest publicly-accessible sets of meticulously-curated natural-language data on the planet, right? And so when you're training up a new model, you're naturally going to start with that massive, freely-available repository?

Every major AI model has been trained, at least partially, on Wikipedia. This insane viewpoint is essentially saying that you don't think Wikipedia is reliable, but if some linear algebra chews it up for a few minutes, then it's ok. You're turning up your nose at tap water, but drinking your inside dog's urine.

[-] Bread@thelemmy.club 1 points 1 hour ago

Do you know how many living people are unable to get probable lies about themselves removed from wikipedia? Wikipedia is barely better than just taking random reddit comments as truth.

[-] rbos@lemmy.ca 16 points 9 hours ago

Then contribute to it. Bring receipts and evidence. Those are the table stakes. Without that, you'll get laughed out like the clown you are. You don't bring hearsay and prejudice to an evidence fight.

Wikipedia has its problems, but 'balance' is not near the top of the list.

[-] Fluke@feddit.uk 16 points 10 hours ago
[-] Thalion@lemmy.ca 12 points 9 hours ago

Reality has a well known liberal bias

this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2026
468 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

85675 readers
3387 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS