I believe they are just saying that fandom.com sucked and made the internet worse even from the start, not necessarily that Jimmy Wales is corrupt. Wikipedia a

I believe they are just saying that fandom.com sucked and made the internet worse even from the start, not necessarily that Jimmy Wales is corrupt. Wikipedia actually does appear to have separate pages for every Lord of the Rings character. Frankly I think it makes sense for this series, since there's a truly unusual and effortful amount of worldbuilding behind its scenes, and since it has been so influential to fiction (even regardless of medium). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings Anyway, Jimmy Wales doesn't unilaterally make article inclusion/exclusion decisions; there's a whole debate and voting process that Wikipedians use to make decisions like that. So if anyone were to be called corrupt for making ill-fated decisions to delete articles, it would be a bunch of pseudonymous Wikipedia users. And I think they likely acted in good faith, trying to improve the encyclopedia, even though it didn't work out well and wasn't what I would have done.