6 ms·

I've seen claims about Wikipedia pushing both pro-Israel and pro-Palestine agenda, depending on who you ask. Which only makes me think that the real bias lies i

I've seen claims about Wikipedia pushing both pro-Israel and pro-Palestine agenda, depending on who you ask. Which only makes me think that the real bias lies in the reader.

Pay08 5mo ago
That's because apparently adhering to Wikipedia's own policies is a "pro-Israel" agenda. Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger (the founders of Wikipedia) have both called out the site/foundation on this, but I can't find the one on Sanger from a more trustworthy source than the New York Post. https://www.theverge.com/news/813245/wikipedia-co-founder-jimmy-wales-gaza-genocide https://www.theverge.com/news/813245/wikipedia-co-founder-ji... https://nypost.com/2025/03/10/business/wikipedia-disrupted-by-edit-wars-to-manipulate-pages-on-war-in-gaza-report/ https://nypost.com/2025/03/10/business/wikipedia-disrupted-b...
nashashmi 5mo ago
On the current events page, yes there is a bias. It will take time for them to be ironed out. I was referring to misinformation and disinformation on historical events. I have seen two parallel articles, the second created to give an incorrect narrative, of an event.