[1]: https://davidrozado.substack.com/p/is-wikipedia-politically-...
[2]: https://www.piratewires.com/p/how-the-regime-captured-wikipe...
[3]: https://larrysanger.org/2020/05/wikipedia-is-badly-biased/
[4]: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5022797
There is no bias to the left. The USA has shifted so far to the right that balance now looks leftist.
In a truly random U.S. sample you would expect Republican identifiers to be nearly as numerous as Democratic identifiers.
Not sure where you got your numbers from.
Can't find the link I wanted, it was on HN this year, IIRC.
Is an editor "evil" for deleting or debating the addition of a politically charged article? Come on.
I weep for this country: if we had a voting system that allowed multiple parties (>2) to really compete, we could have an intellectually honest right wing.
This seems to presume that the desireable middle ground would be the average of two US parties. But Wikipedia is global. (Not to imply it would be fine for the US, but that's another argument)
Sanity and common sense, not "right wing" is coming for Wikipedia and for everything else.
As usual, it will overshoot and swing too much to the right and the cycle will repeat.
stronglikedan•1h ago