Yes, but there is a stark and important difference between "this looks sensible and isn't going to cause problems but needs improvements" and "must contain BBC

Yes, but there is a stark and important difference between "this looks sensible and isn't going to cause problems but needs improvements" and "must contain BBC or CNN link or it not be real" which I think has been lost on the editors of Wikipedia. If biases have been introduced in one way then there well could be additional biases which need to be checked for or which have come about through the first bias through correlation. Whilst I don't agree with turning everything into a gender war I do feel Wikipedia as a "factual resource" is open for correct ridicule if it's not being fair and unbiased. Otherwise it's not truely factual.