this post was submitted on 23 Jun 2026
418 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

85694 readers
3685 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
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
418
Wikipedia Cofounder Larry Sanger Banned From Site for ‘Canvassing’ (www.404media.co)
submitted 1 day ago by tonytins@pawb.social to c/technology@lemmy.world
105 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 42 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

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.

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

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 10 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

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

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 4 points 19 hours ago

Yep.

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

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today -1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

wikipedia was never seen as a legit source, plus often subjects are outdated and not true in some cases, you are not allowed to cite from in academia, of course you can go the references it has. one time in the 2000s i was using wiki the computer lab moniter person got mad i was even on the page for more than a minute.

i think the recent attacks, by i think Starmer trying to write favorable entries about him has largely been ignoreed.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago

Wikipedia is not a source but an information aggregate. You don't even understand what you are criticizing so confidently - how sad is that?

[–] Bazoogle@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day 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.”