You're making an astute observation about how Wikipedia is different from, say, Twitter or Facebook. Twitter and Facebook do not claim their users' content as t

You're making an astute observation about how Wikipedia is different from, say, Twitter or Facebook. Twitter and Facebook do not claim their users' content as their own in the same way the Wikimedia Foundation does in the case of Wikipedia, where when they solicit donations for themselves they make no distinction between support for themselves and support for Wikipedia. So I understand why you would see editors as agents for the Wikimedia Foundation. Still, Section 230 is what it is, and the Foundation has consistently been given the benefit of its protection.