Wikipedia Co-Founder Blocked From Editing Pages After Pushing for Intellectual Diversity
“Wikipedia is so woke they blocked their own founder for trying to make it unbiased.”
For years now, Larry Sanger has been trying to save the site he co-founded, Wikipedia, from itself and anonymous administrators whose attempts to keep the information posted on the various Wiki pages one-sided (anti-America, anti-conservatism, anti-Israel) have drawn sharp criticism not just from Sanger and conservative commentators but also from Congress.
Legal Insurrection has extensively covered this issue, with the small sampling of articles below giving more background on the problems, the bad faith actors involved, and who all is trying to do something about it:
- Report: Anti-Israel, Pro-Hamas Bias at Wikipedia Continues Despite Widespread Criticism
- Oversight Committee to Investigate Alleged Anti-Israel, Pro-Kremlin Information Manipulation by Wikipedia
- Law Students at Harvard Hold ‘Wikipedia Edit-a-Thon’ Targeting Firms That Criticized School’s Response to Antisemitism
- Study Finds Political Bias Against Conservatives on Wikipedia
Earlier this week, Sanger, who formally left the site in 2002 but came back last fall, revealed that he has now been “indefinitely banned” from being able to edit the pages on the site that he co-founded:
Well, that’s that—I’ve been blocked by Wikipedia “indefinitely” for unstated reasons, by the “consensus” of a mob. There was no due process, no prosecutor, no dispassionate judge, no jury, no interpretation of law. All my judges were self-selected and hated me. 🤣 pic.twitter.com/N57BRWTG4K
— Larry Sanger (@lsanger) June 22, 2026
Ostensibly, his crimes were allegedly trying to recruit non-Wiki users to join Wiki to influence the outcome of discussions currently being debated on the platform. He was also accused of trying to undermine Wikipedia, of using it as a “battleground,” and of not really being there to edit:
I’ll be telling the story from my own perspective, and what we can learn from it, soon enough. (Incognito for the next few hours BTW.)
— Larry Sanger (@lsanger) June 22, 2026
One of the most important insights to emerge from this SNAFU is that the one unforgivable sin on Wikipedia is criticizing the system. Forget any reform. The Wikipedia blob will have its way and then congratulate itself that it was following tHe RuLeS and standing on principle.
— Larry Sanger (@lsanger) June 22, 2026
His biggest “crime” of all, though, was to form the WikiProject Intellectual Diversity (WID) group. Because trying to steer Wikipedia away from leftist GroupThink mentality is equivalent to a declaration of war as far as its editors are concerned:
Left-leaning website Wikipedia has taken the drastic action of permanently blocking one of its founders from editing pages — after he had campaigned to make it more balanced and fair.
Last month, Larry Sanger launched WikiProject Intellectual Diversity (WID), a group designed to help reinforce the online encyclopedia’s “original, firm commitment to intellectual diversity,” by emphasizing neutrality and transparency.
[…]
“I am flabbergasted,” Sanger told The Post, saying the decision was made by a group of the site’s volunteer editors. He described the modern Wikipedia community as being like a “mob or a blob,” noting users do not feel obligated to a specific vision of the rules, but rather to each other.
[…]
Sanger became unpopular among the site’s most prolific editors for making public calls for those whose viewpoints have typically been underrepresented — Hindus prominently, but also, most pointedly, American conservatives — to be more involved.
Wikipedia is so woke they blocked their own founder for trying to make it unbiased. pic.twitter.com/yyXoY6XLSd
— Katie Miller (@KatieMiller) June 25, 2026
I think that sums things up rather nicely.
– Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via X. –
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Free speech is an anathema to the communists at wikipedia. While I use the site as it’s hard not to I try to maintain the thought in my mind that it is heavily biased and edited by scum you wouldn’t trust to take out your garbage.
Creating wikipedia was a good deed at the beginning anyway. Remember that no good deed never goes unpunished, Sanger should not be surprised at what has transpired,
Judged “for unstated reasons, by the ‘consensus’ of a mob. There was no due process, no prosecutor, no dispassionate judge, no jury, no interpretation of law. All my judges were self-selected and hated me.”
Unsurprising, as this, no doubt, is part of the DSA’s plan for us all.
The leaders of the DSA publicly made this statement that “in essence they teamed with the Democrats because they knew they could get the Democrats to win.”” Once the winning is over, socialism or frankly, Islamism, they well enter all our lives. Between the latter two, unless Americans wake up, Islam, most likely would win. Think about that in regard to your daughters, wives, girlfriends, aunts, nieces, etc.
Louder!!!!!
Wikipedia is trash. Search engines need to blacklist it. Oh sorry, I meant “of color” list it.
No, it is not. And that’s what makes this situation unfortunate. It is very reliable when it comes to many, many subjects. Most, I’d even venture to say. It is marred by its coverage of current events and politics. Naturally, I don’t use Wikipedia to get information about any subject that is susceptible to wokeness, as you can be sure if it’s susceptible, it’s been contaminated. But avoiding such subjects still leaves a vast collection of very solid information on just about everything else.
Unfortunately you can’t predict when the crazy bias will jump up and destroy facts they don’t like in any topic. Even topics you would think could not have controversies.
Wiki is a good first place to seek broad info and basic facts before moving on to more specific research of a topic. It ain’t the be all/end all but it is OK when used appropriately, always keeping the basic rules of ‘its on the internet and you get what you pay for’ in mind.
intellectual diversity is the only diversity that matters
Citing Wikipedia in anything is like using a coloring book as an encyclopedia
My son watches a cartoon that regularly makes fun of Wikipedia calling it iffy-pedia and having a running joke that whatever the kids research on there is probably completely wrong. You know when you are getting lampooned by Captain Underpants that you’ve jumped the shark.
Imagine a dictionary that can be changed by anyone. How would you ever know what was real or fake? That’s Wikipedia. In a way it is like our federal judges and their actions. They can stop the POTUS on almost anything without blinking just like Wikipedia can with it articles on the truth. To me it’s like Axios or Politico, they are so untruthful that I read nothing they print.
Larry Sanger learns what lies at the end of the “principled high road”:
…the commons of the tragedy.
“Intellectual diversity.” A fancy way of saying illiterate/low IQ/woke, you know just like DEI.
I got blocked years ago. Leftists have complete control and will publish any lie the see fit to publish and will not left facts get in the way.
Leave a Comment