620

Larry Sanger, one of Wikipedia’s cofounders, was banned from editing the site indefinitely after other editors determined he was canvassing, or in other words, calling on his followers off platform in order to influence Wikipedia’s content.

Sanger has spent more than a decade criticizing Wikipedia for what he claims is an ideological, left-wing bias on a variety of topics, and on X has framed this recent ban as further proof of everything that’s wrong with Wikipedia. The New York Post took that bait and last night published an article with the headline “Left-leaning Wikipedia blocked founder from editing site—after he campaigned to make it more balanced.”

Wikipedia editors obviously reject that framing and say that Sanger was banned for wielding his followers to sway discussion and decision making on Wikipedia. The discussion that led to the decision to ban Sanger concluded with what an editor called a “clear consensus” to ban Sanger.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] Folstar@lemmus.org 55 points 3 days ago

Accusing a site of being left bias then turning it into a right wing shithole has, sadly, worked time and time again. Let's hope Wikipedia can keep holding out.

[-] cobalt32@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 3 days ago

So long as reliable secondary sources exist, Wikipedia will exist.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] webkitten@piefed.social 58 points 3 days ago

He's not really a founder; he didn't even have anything to do with it.

And he's a right wrong fascist so banning him is a good thing.

[-] umbraroze@slrpnk.net 17 points 3 days ago

To me, Larry Sanger always struck me more as an Ideas Guy. Specifically, the kind of an Ideas Guy who didn't always have the best ideas. He keeps dissing Wikipedia, but just look at the absolute trainwrecks his supposedly better other projects turned out.

[-] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 51 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Sander hasn't been a part of the Wikipedia project since 2002.

He launched a competing project - Citizendium - which flopped. Also, the Digital Universe Encyclopedia web project, which went nowhere. And Encyclopedia of Earth which also failed to launch. WatchKnowLearn and Infobitt did a bit better, but neither became household names.

Basically, he's been bouncing in and out of middling projects for the better part of 25 years. And I suspect this string of failures hasn't been particularly good for his ego.

[-] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 17 points 3 days ago

Leaves the first encyclopedia site

Wonders why a bunch of shit-tier clones with worse branding never catch on

Thinks he's this guy:

Is actually this guy:

[-] nialv7@lemmy.world 56 points 3 days ago

The thing is Wikipedia isn't even left-wing. User survey shows the editors holds left-wing and right-wing beliefs about equally. And Jimmy Wales, the founder, is an Ayn Rand reading "objectivist" for crying out loud.

[-] IronBird@lemmy.world 35 points 3 days ago

reality has a well known left-wing bias

[-] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 24 points 3 days ago

If you base something on facts, it will be left leaning. Right leaning has a higher value in loyalty, authority, respect, and spirituality. They will deny facts if they have to in order to prioritize their other values. Right leaning people tend to be more likely to be on time, have cleaner desks, and speak more formally to someone they deem a "superior". Left leaning often could give a rats ass about authority, and respect is only given once it's earned.

All that to say, facts and reality are more left leaning by nature. Given many religious folks will deny nature's history for their spiritual beliefs.

[-] Captain_Patchy@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago

reality has a well known left-wing bias

No, it's just that the right-wing has become accustomed to lying it's ass off to get what it wants.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 10 points 3 days ago

And in the left Lemmy communities is known as 'nato-pedia' for his Western pov bias

[-] Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 days ago

User survey shows the editors hold left-wing and right-wing beliefs about equally

all i found was that self-responses are preponderantly left/center-left: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2024-04-25/Recent_research

Political position of Wikipedia users, based on responses to the survey question "In political matters, people talk of 'the left' and 'the right.' How would you place your views on this scale, generally speaking? [You position on the left-right scale]" [sic], with the answer hint "The scale goes from 1 (left) to 10 (right)." Visualization of data from: Cruciani, Caterina; Joubert, Léo; Jullien, Nicolas; Mell, Laurent; Piccione, Sasha; Vermeirsche, Jeanne (2023-12-01), Surveying Wikipedians: a dataset of users and contributors’ practices on Wikipedia in 8 languages doi:10.34847/nkl.4ecf4u8m, see also m:Research:Surveying readers and contributors to Wikipedia (June/July 2023 survey of Wikipedia readers and contributors in 8 languages)

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 53 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

This is fine.

But the optics are important. There’s a concerted effort to delegitimize Wikipedia as an information source, as it’s not in Big Tech’s control.

And they don’t have to kill it. They just have to make it less popular than, say, Grokipedia, and every headline like this is a step in that direction.

Hence I have very scientifically minded family who are already saying some strange things about Wikipedia.

[-] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I notice Grokipedia is getting put up more on search results even on duckduckgo.

[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago

Yep.

That’s because DDG is Bing. To be blunt, it’s search is kinda terrible.

[-] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago

This headline isn't a bad headline. The article seems to be pretty well balanced, and leaves plenty siding with Wikipedia. It even mentions another news article that DOES have a bad headline:

Sanger has spent more than a decade criticizing Wikipedia for what he claims is an ideological, left-wing bias on a variety of topics, and on X has framed this recent ban as further proof of everything that’s wrong with Wikipedia. The New York Post took that bait and last night published an article with the headline “Left-leaning Wikipedia blocked founder from editing site—after he campaigned to make it more balanced.”

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Triumph@fedia.io 228 points 4 days ago

Reality has a liberal bias.

[-] Maeve@kbin.earth 112 points 4 days ago
[-] Triumph@fedia.io 54 points 4 days ago

Colbert used the term in a more traditional sense, as opposed to how it's sometimes used now as an insult by harder leftists.

[-] Maeve@kbin.earth 35 points 4 days ago

The more traditional sense is the global definition.

[-] Triumph@fedia.io 35 points 4 days ago

I knew you knew that, my comment was more for the passers-by who may not even be old enough to remember that it was a Colbert quote.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] XLE@piefed.social 169 points 4 days ago

Part of Larry Sanger's statement

"In the kangaroo court in which a mob ousted me, Wikipedia’s administrators showed that they don’t appear to value details like formal charges, a designated prosecutor, basic decorum, distinction between prosecution and judge..."

Does this guy think Wikipedia is run like a country

[-] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago

Does this guy think Wikipedia is run like a country

He should blame the guys that found the website for the structure of the rules governing it.

[-] lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world 46 points 4 days ago

Faux News melts their brain and breaks who they are as people

[-] antonim@lemmy.world 117 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Sanger was laid off from Wikipedia early on, started a competitor site that failed, and then returned to Wikipedia not so much to contribute but to rail against the project, his only credentials being setting up some of the crucial rules for the site two decades ago. It was really pathetic, like an ex pestering the other one years after the breakup, unable to move on. I hope he finds a better hobby now.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 153 points 4 days ago

I’m not sure the NYP took the bait, they’re more like the bait shop; more than happy to sell whatever the right wing outrage machine is selling on a given day.

[-] thisbenzingring@lemmy.today 32 points 4 days ago

And when there's nothing to sell today, they'll drum up some shit for a sale tomorrow

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Curious_Canid@piefed.ca 111 points 3 days ago

"Reality has a well-known liberal bias." --Stephen Colbert

[-] Hapankaali@lemmy.world 34 points 3 days ago

What's funny is that Jimmy Wales, who has described himself as an objectivist, is far from "leftist" or "liberal" himself. But unlike this asshole, he is principled.

[-] brsrklf@jlai.lu 17 points 3 days ago

In the end conservatism is only appealing to those in power. And people with power work every day to ensure everyone else has none.

[-] HAL_9_TRILLION@lemmy.dbzer0.com 122 points 4 days ago

In the kangaroo court in which a mob ousted me, Wikipedia’s administrators showed that they don’t appear to value details like formal charges, a designated prosecutor, basic decorum, distinction between prosecution and judge, dispassionate adjudication, and so forth

These hypocrite fucks always rail off at the mouth about how abused they are... and it's always just to get their foot in the door. Once they run the show, they rewrite history, dole out all the abuse they want and face zero repercussions. Intolerant shits that the rest of us simply must tolerate. Well go fuck yourself Larry Sanger. The world doesn't need more right-wing bullshit.

[-] communism@lemmy.ml 25 points 3 days ago

Wikipedia’s administrators showed that they don’t appear to value details like formal charges, a designated prosecutor, basic decorum, distinction between prosecution and judge, dispassionate adjudication

  1. It would be deranged and far from a good thing if online moderation and dispute adjudication decided to use a criminal model of trying to prove a person's guilt

  2. The real life criminal justice system is the opposite of unbiased and fair

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Herr_S_aus_H@lemmy.zip 54 points 3 days ago

Will he start working for conervapedia now?
Good work by wikipedia. Always good to get the trash out.

[-] 58008@lemmy.world 34 points 3 days ago

I read his "contributions" to the Gaza genocide article's talk page, along with the equally mealy-mouthed hand-wringing of Jimmy Wales. Total bellends both, although for different reasons. Jimmy is pressured into being an annoying grandstanding dickhead by Israeli interests, whereas Larry's pressured into being an annoying grandstanding dickhead by his childhood.

[-] Cleisthenian@lemmy.ml 55 points 4 days ago

These reactionaries will never be happy until literally everything is a fascist propaganda outlet. Not content with all mainstream media and social media, wikipedia and other community information hubs must fall next

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 43 points 4 days ago

That is very much the definition of snowflake behaviour.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2026
620 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

85779 readers
3652 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS