didn’t mean to put NYT on the same level on a newswire lol. I still think NYT will not present overt lies but I agree that they can construe things extremely misleadingly.

Al Jazeera has less bias than the Canary article OP posted, and TOI and NYPost—on the opposite bias—and Gizmodo—which is as neutral as Variety—made the same mistake. What is happening? At least I can still trust Reuters and NYT.

Anyways, my point is all Wales did was basically make a post to Wikipedia’s official forum.

Where is the headline substantiated? Where does the article say that Wales removed the relevant article content? He has not. Check for yourselves: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gaza_genocide&action=history&offset=&limit=500 It saddens me that news outlets are making false headlines like this. All he did was what the article mentioned about talking on the talk page.

A handful of outlets I thought reliable (from Al Jazeera to Jerusalem Post, both sides of the spectrum) also at least initially said that Wales blocked non-admins from editing the article. What is this nonsense? Wales has no extra permissions besides what anyone with 500 edits has. The “Founder” user right is purely decorative.

@DriftingLynx@lemmy.ca @UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world @pelespirit@sh.itjust.works Is there something I’m missing here?