Wikipedia:Press coverage 2025

Shortcut

• WP:PRESS 25WP:PRESS 25

Since its inception in 2001, Wikipedia has garnered substantial media attention. The following is a list of the project's press coverage received in 2025, sorted chronologically. Per WP:PRESS, this page excludes coverage exclusively on a single WP-article, coverage of (some aspect of) the project overall is wanted.

January

• Kredo, Adam (January 2, 2025). "Wikipedia Declares Hamas the Victor in Nearly Every Battle Against Israel Since 10/7—Then Quietly Deletes Section". The Washington Free Beacon. Retrieved January 3, 2025. Joe Truzman, an expert on Palestinian militant groups with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank, said the latest online controversy highlights the often inaccurate nature of Wikipedia's entries about Israel.
• Krymalowski, Sarah (January 6, 2025). "Meet the Nunavut grandpa who has made over 250,000 Wikipedia edits". CBC.ca. Retrieved January 6, 2025. His first project was to try and add a Wikipedia page for every airport in Canada, no matter how small. Then he moved on to weather monitoring equipment. He was made an administrator after just months as an editor. He said that now, the process is quite rigorous, but at the time, it was pretty informal.
• Rosenfeld, Arno (January 7, 2025). "Scoop: Heritage Foundation plans to 'identify and target' Wikipedia editors". The Forward. Retrieved January 7, 2025. The Heritage Foundation plans to 'identify and target' volunteer editors on Wikipedia who it says are 'abusing their position' by publishing content the group believes to be antisemitic
• Hampton, Daniel (January 7, 2025). "Right-wing think tank plans to target Wikipedia editors via malicious links: report". Raw Story. Retrieved January 8, 2025. "The slideshow says the group's 'targeting methodologies' would include creating fake Wikipedia user accounts to try to trick editors into identifying themselves by sharing personal information or clicking on malicious tracking links that can identify people who click on them. It is unclear whether this has begun," according to the Forward.
• Kaplan, Josh (January 7, 2025). "We can't let anti-Israel activists poison the well of Wikipedia". The Jewish Chronicle. Retrieved January 8, 2025. This is how you get every Wikipedia article vaguely mentioning Israel becoming a catalogue of anti-Zionism.
• Jones, Marcie (January 8, 2025). "Wikipedia Won't Let Elon Musk Fluff His Resume. Heritage Foundation Will Help By Terrorizing The Editors". Wonkette. Retrieved January 8, 2025. Whatever would they do with editors' personal information? Send them fruit baskets, surely!
• Gault, Matthew (January 8, 2025). "The People Behind Project 2025 Want to Reveal the Identities of Wikipedia Editors". Gizmodo. Retrieved January 8, 2025. What did Wikipedia do with that $31.2 million? It gave much of it out as grant money. In the Middle East, it funded the Arab Reports for Investigative Journalism, which helps train journalists in Arab countries. In Brazil, it funded the InternetLab which spent the money researching racial disparities and internet access in the country. In North America, it gave money to the Racial Equity in Journalism Fund, which helped fund local newsgathering.
• Kushner, Aviya (January 8, 2025). "What critics miss when they accuse Israel of 'scholasticide' and 'domicide'". The Forward. Retrieved March 19, 2025. And this must be said: The cascade of newish terms ending in "cide" — "scholasticide," "educide" and "domicide" — all have one thing in common on Wikipedia: The current war in Gaza is always used as an example.
• Zeisloft, Ben (January 9, 2025). "Group Behind Project 2025 to Target Rogue Wikipedia Editors, Hold Them Accountable: Report". The Western Journal. Retrieved January 9, 2025. The Heritage Foundation launched a new effort to track down volunteer editors on Wikipedia who are publishing what they believe to be antisemitic content.
• "Finding hidden biases in Wikipedia's multilingual content". Johns Hopkins University. January 9, 2025. Retrieved January 9, 2025. By creating and deploying a new tool called INFOGAP, the researchers used artificial intelligence to look at how biographical information about LGBT people is presented across the English, Russian, and French versions of Wikipedia and found inconsistencies in how they are portrayed.
• Rabey, Steve (January 9, 2025). "Heritage Foundation antisemitism effort recycles conspiracy theories". Baptist News Global. Retrieved January 10, 2025. The pressure on Wikipedia comes as the online, user-generated encyclopedia has been under fire from some Jewish organizations for its coverage of the war in Gaza and for labeling the Anti-Defamation League a "generally unreliable source" on the war. Wikipedia says the ADL is a pro-Israel activist group that declares nearly any criticism of Jews or Israel antisemitic.
• O'Cearbhaill, Muiris (January 10, 2025). "Most of the Irish-language Wikipedia was written by editors who did not speak Irish". TheJournal.ie. Retrieved January 10, 2025. Speaking to The Journal, Uí Ríordáin – who is full-time employee at Wikipedia Community Ireland – said that Vicipéid has helped to boost the confidence of students and other non-native speakers in their ability to use Irish.
• Богудан, Назар (January 12, 2025). "Wikimedia Ukraine has published a list of the most visited articles on the Ukrainian Wikipedia for 2024". Baltimore Chronicle. Retrieved January 12, 2025. The leader of the rating was an article about Oleksandr Syrsky, the commander of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, which was viewed over 1.1 million times. In second place is an article about Ukraine, and the top three is an article about Ukrainian boxer Oleksandr Usyk.
• Montgomery, Blake (January 14, 2025). "How to politicize the truth on Facebook, Instagram, and Wikipedia". The Guardian. Retrieved January 14, 2025. The differences between Facebook, Instagram and Wikipedia are as vast as the Gulf of America, though: the goal of Wikipedia is to compile and spread accurate information. That is not the aim of Facebook, Instagram, or any other social network, and has never been one of its strong points.
• Morrow, Allison (January 14, 2025). "In a minefield of glitchy AI search and social media, Wikipedia becomes one of the most reliable places on the internet". CNN. Retrieved January 14, 2025. ...the first non-sponsored, non-AI search result: an entry from one of the most reliable places on the internet, Wikipedia. If I'd written that last sentence at the start of my career, no editor would have allowed it into print. You can't trust something that anyone can edit, the thinking went, and so it became a bad word in journalism and academia. Don't cite it; don't even look at it. Or if you do, for God's sake, don't let anyone see you.
• "AI giant's Desi CEO says 'pretty clear Wikipedia is biased'; wants to build 'neutral and unbiased: Wikipedia rival". The Times of India. January 15, 2025. Retrieved January 15, 2025. Aravind Srinivas criticizes Wikipedia's neutrality, urging for unbiased alternatives.
• "Wikipedia Turns 24: Here's How The People's Encyclopedia Has Evolved Over The Years". ABP News. January 15, 2025. Retrieved January 15, 2025. Beyond its functional value, Wikipedia has become a cultural phenomenon. It has inspired memes, informed countless debates, and even become a trusted companion for breaking news. Its transparent editing history also provides a unique window into how society's understanding of events evolves over time.
• Chakraborty, Rajarsi (January 15, 2025). ""How? They've been asking for $1 for 84 years"- Internet reacts as Wikipedia turns 24". Sportskeeda. Retrieved January 15, 2025. Users on X were quick to react to the website turning 24.
• Purdy, Kevin (January 16, 2025). "The Editors weaves Wikipedia's volunteers into a global suspense tale". Ars Technica. Retrieved January 17, 2025. It's always fascinating to me how, by and large, every page is so much better than I think it will be. Really high-energy, maybe "truth optional" pages for topics like cryptocurrencies. It's a small miracle that they're as orderly and reasonable as they end up being.
• Bussigny, Nora (January 17, 2025). "Nous avons infiltré une formation d'Urgence Palestine pour influencer Wikipédia" [We infiltrated a Palestine Emergency formation to influence Wikipedia]. Le Point (in French). Retrieved January 28, 2025. According to Bader, so far, no structured French group is working on Palestine, unlike the "other side" namely Israel, which is said to be "organized." On the English Wikipedia, the pro-Palestinians are "more numerous, they have been attacked, they have been targeted, but they are successful," Bader specifies. [Google translate]
• Bandler, Aaron (January 18, 2025). "Wikipedia's Supreme Court On the Verge of Topic Banning 8 Editors from Israel-Palestine Area". The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles. Retrieved January 19, 2025. Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee (ArbCom), which is the site's version of the Supreme Court, is on the verge of issuing indefinite topic bans to eight editors involved in the Israel-Palestine topic area, most of them of being anti-Israel editors.
• "Anti-Israel Wikipedia editors face bans after spreading hate, misinformation". The Jerusalem Post. January 20, 2025. Retrieved January 20, 2025. Multiple anti-Israel Wikipedia editors are likely to be topic-banned after spreading misinformation and hate across the site, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) announced on Friday.
• Sugy, Paul (January 21, 2025). "«La majorité des contributeurs sont de gauche» : comment Wikipédia a cessé d'être neutre" ["The majority of contributors are left-wing": How Wikipedia stopped being neutral]. Le Figaro. Retrieved January 30, 2025. On the side of Wikimedia France, whose ideological orientations Le Figaro has already reported , murky links have existed for several years between members of the board of directors and the association " les sans pagEs " which pays employees to produce Wikipedia content on people belonging to groups identified as minorities and underrepresented in the encyclopedia.[Google translate]
• Mannen, Amanda (January 22, 2025). "21 Wikipedia Pages We Can't Believe Are Real". Cracked.com. Retrieved January 22, 2025. You could just hit "random page" and not get bored for at least as long as it takes to convince your boss that you're working.
• Sherratt, Madeline (January 22, 2025). "Elon Musk furious after Wikipedia page calls his controversial gesture a 'Nazi salute'". The Independent. Retrieved January 22, 2025. "Since legacy media propaganda is considered a "valid" source by Wikipedia, it naturally simply becomes an extension of legacy media propaganda!", he wrote on X.
• Thompson, Sophie (January 22, 2025). "Elon Musk is now demanding action against Wikipedia following inauguration gesture fallout". Indy100.com. Retrieved January 22, 2025. "Wikipedia is completely ideologically captured. Deserves $0 in donations until they re-balance", the author wrote. After seeing the post, Musk chimed in demanding action taken against Wikipedia. "Defund Wikipedia until balance is restored!", he wrote.
• Burman, Theo (January 22, 2025). "Wikipedia Fires Back at Elon Musk". Newsweek. Retrieved January 22, 2025. "Defund Wikipedia until balance is restored!" Musk wrote on X. "Stop donating to Wokepedia until they restore balance to their editing authority." However, Wales replied to Musk, defending the site and criticizing the tech CEO for stirring up anger.
• "Wikipedia could ban eight editors accused of anti-Israel bias indefinitely". Allisrael.com. January 22, 2025. Retrieved January 22, 2025. The editor of the blog "The Wikipedia Flood," however, said the topic bans are barely enough, especially given the large number of editors involved, and the fact that so many of those involved were not part of the disciplinary action.
• Fung, Katherine (January 22, 2025). "Why Is MAGA Setting Its Sights on Wikipedia?". Newsweek. Retrieved January 22, 2025. The emerging coalition of MAGA supporters and Silicon Valley's tech bros and venture capitalists has found a new shared target to set its sights on: the world's largest free encyclopedia.
• Becca, Milfeld (January 23, 2025). "Musk calls for defunding of Wikipedia over description of gesture". The Japan Times. Retrieved January 23, 2025. While Musk's animosity towards Wikipedia may focus outwardly on the hand gesture, Wikipedia's goal of factual neutrality makes it a natural adversary to X — a platform increasingly synonymous with heated culture wars, hate speech and disinformation. Wikipedia and the media at large — which Musk has increasingly criticized — also pose a threat by holding him accountable as he thrusts himself into the center of U.S. politics.
• Elia-Shalev, Asaf (January 23, 2025). "Edit wars over Israel spur rare ban of 8 Wikipedia editors — from both sides". Jewish Telegraphic Agency. Retrieved January 24, 2025. Eight Wikipedia editors accused of disruptive behavior have been barred from making changes to articles on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, following a a ruling issued Thursday by the crowd-sourced encyclopedia's highest oversight body.
• Lewis, John (January 27, 2025). "Redressing the gender imbalance on Wikipedia". Otago Daily Times. Retrieved January 27, 2025. She said her Wikipedia editing journey began back in 2018 with learning about what was considered notable on the site and identifying where there were gaps which really needed to be filled.
• Bandler, Aaron (January 27, 2025). "French Journalist Exposes Anti-Israel Club Training French Wikipedia Editors". The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles. Retrieved January 28, 2025. Bussigny told me ... "However, I was keen to reveal and prove through this immersion that fiercely anti-Zionist organized networks are targeting the online encyclopedia, which is extremely popular in France, especially among pupils and students who may be unknowingly influenced."
• "Wikipedia bans eight editors, six of them anti-Israel". Jewish News Syndicate. January 28, 2025. Retrieved January 28, 2025. The behavior of anti-Israel Wikipedia editors has been in the news lately.
• Leloup, Damien (January 29, 2025). "Why Elon Musk is calling for a boycott of Wikipedia". Le Monde. Retrieved January 30, 2025. Yet Wikipedia remains one of the few major platforms where political debates can take place in a way that is both intense and calm, even on the most controversial subjects, Vermeirsche noted.
• Minhas, Shahid; Salawu, Abiodun (January 29, 2025). "Wikipedia and indigenous language preservation: analysis of Setswana and Punjabi languages". Frontiers in Communication. Retrieved February 7, 2025. However, both languages benefit from the visibility and preservation opportunities provided by the platform. Qualitative content analysis demonstrated that both Wikipedia editions contain a mix of cultural, historical, and contemporary topics.
• Grevy Gotfredsen, Sarah (January 30, 2025). "The Right Takes Aim at Wikipedia". Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved January 30, 2025. Might Wikipedia, the ever-evolving online compendium of human knowledge, become the latest target in the new administration's crackdown on public sources of information?

February

• Schneider, Dan; Cornelio, Luis (February 3, 2025). "Wikipedia's Blacklist: Smearing Trump, Conservatives, And The GOP". The Daily Wire. Retrieved February 3, 2025. The bottom line: 84% of Left-leaning outlets have Wikipedia's stamp of approval, while 0% of right-leaning outlets even get a wink from the tech giant.
• Cornelio, Luis (February 3, 2025). "EXCLUSIVE: Wikipedia Effectively Blacklists ALL Right-Leaning Media; Smearing Trump, GOP and Conservatives". NewsBusters. Retrieved February 3, 2025. Wikipedia warns that if "no such source exists, that may suggest that the information is inaccurate." In other words, the only media reports that are considered trustworthy are those reported by leftist, legacy media.
• Joseph, MacKinnon (February 4, 2025). "Wikipedia blacklists Blaze News and other right-leaning sources, ensuring it's a one-stop liberal propaganda shop". Blaze Media. Retrieved February 5, 2025. It's no secret that Wikipedia's volunteer editors are predominantly ideological myopes favorable to leftist causes, ideas, and personalities and antipathetic to conservatives of various stripes.
• Harrison, Stephen (February 5, 2025). "Project 2025's Creators Want to Dox Wikipedia Editors. The Tool They're Using Is Horrifying". Slate. Retrieved February 5, 2025. It seems that both the CCP and Heritage believe that if you can't win an argument in the digital space of Wikipedia, it's fair game to destroy that person's life offline.
• "Big Tech must block Wikipedia until it stops censoring and pushing disinformation". New York Post. February 5, 2025. Retrieved February 6, 2025. The source blacklist has zero to do with accuracy and everything to do with shutting down any journalist who doesn't bend the knee to the left. And stifling any discourse not approved by progressive would-be overlords in biz and government and the NGO sector. In other words, Wikipedia is engaged in an actual disinformation op.
• Carroll, Tobias (February 5, 2025). "How Long Can Wikipedia Hold On?". InsideHook. Retrieved February 6, 2025. I think that there's this political-industrial complex right now where everything is being politicized, right? And the right wing has an interest in portraying Wikipedia as left-wing and a kind of liberal media. ... But if I had to guess, I think it's going to get worse before it gets better in terms of partisan rhetoric about Wikipedia.
• Shroff, Lila (February 5, 2025). "Elon Musk Wants What He Can't Have: Wikipedia". The Atlantic. Retrieved February 6, 2025. Wikipedia is certainly not immune to bad information, disagreement, or political warfare, but its openness and transparency rules have made it a remarkably reliable platform in a decidedly unreliable age. Evidence that it's an outright propaganda arm of the left, or of any political party, is thin.
• Hurley, Bevan (February 6, 2025). "Wikipedia accused of blacklisting conservative US media". The Times. Retrieved February 7, 2025. The Media Research Center, a conservative organisation, released a report on the free online encyclopedia's list of "reliable sources". The report said that all the US news sites the centre categorised as right-leaning had failed to meet Wikipedia's criteria as a trusted resource for administrators.
• Kanevskaya, Sofya (February 6, 2025). "Online lifeline". Novaya Gazeta. Retrieved February 9, 2025. Even Wikipedia recognises the gravity of the situation its contributors in Belarus now face, to the extent that they have overridden their own protocols and deleted the entire edit history for Belarus-related articles that could land its users in trouble.
• Mitsui, Mina (February 7, 2025). 「産経新聞はお断り」の移民支援団体 その理由はウィキペディアの乱暴すぎる定義 [Immigration support group declines interview with Sankei Shimbun – the reason is Wikipedia's excessively harsh definition]. Sankei Shimbun (in Japanese). Retrieved March 20, 2025. 英語版は「極右新聞」と書いた韓国の英字誌を引用していた。言葉の壁があるとしても、定義が乱暴すぎる。 [The English Wikipedia article on Sankei Shimbun cited a South Korean English-language magazine that called it a "far-right newspaper." Even though there may be a language barrier, the definition is too rough and simplistic.]
• Prosser, Jordan (February 10, 2025). "Want to know how the world ends? Try this Wikipedia page". The Guardian. Retrieved February 14, 2025. As you scroll through the 2020s, though, you'll notice that the pages keep going: 2026, 2027, 2028 and so on. The reliably dull Wikipedia interface remains unchanged, even as recorded history cedes to speculative history.
• Koebler, Jason (February 11, 2025). "Wikipedia Prepares for 'Increase in Threats' to US Editors From Musk and His Allies". 404 Media. Retrieved February 15, 2025. In a series of calls and letters to the Wikimedia community over the last two weeks, Wikimedia executives have told editors that they are trying to figure out how to keep their users safe in an increasingly hostile political environment.
• Rao, Devika (February 13, 2025). "Elon Musk and Wikipedia are feuding". The Week. Retrieved February 15, 2025. Many worry that Wikipedia contributors could be targeted next. According to documents obtained by the independent news organization Forward, the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank responsible for Project 2025, wants to "use facial recognition software and a database of hacked usernames and passwords in order to identify contributors to the online encyclopedia, who mostly work under pseudonyms." It is not yet clear what the organization would do after identifying the contributors."
• "Elon Musk, Heritage Foundation accused of targeting Wikipedia editors". Moneycontrol.com. February 13, 2025. Retrieved February 15, 2025. In response, Wikimedia is rolling out new security measures. One major change is the temporary accounts program, which will prevent unregistered editors' IP addresses from being visible to the public.
• Ro, Christine (February 19, 2025). "Why these scientists devote time to editing and updating Wikipedia". Nature. Retrieved February 20, 2025. Overall, Wade says, "there's a bunch of old-school scientists who don't think this kind of science communication is credible". Yet, she stresses that Wikipedia editing is easy and rewarding, and a useful way to contribute to research culture.
• Vetter, Matthew A.; Jiang, Jialei; Zachary J., McDowell (February 19, 2025). "An endangered species: how LLMs threaten Wikipedia's sustainability". AI & Society. Retrieved February 23, 2025. Ultimately, this article calls for greater transparency and accountability in how big tech entities use open-access datasets like Wikipedia, advocating for collaborative frameworks prioritizing ethical considerations and equitable representation.
• Chandonnet, Henry (February 21, 2025). "How Wikipedia became a political lightning rod". Fast Company. Retrieved February 23, 2025. The culture wars have come for our public information sources. And Wikipedia is on the chopping block.
• "Wikipedia under fire again: Economist Sanjeev Sanyal says his profile altered using 'circular referencing'". Business Today (India). February 23, 2025. Retrieved February 23, 2025. In November 2024, the Indian government reportedly formally raised concerns over bias and inaccuracies on the platform, citing complaints about a small group of editors exerting disproportionate influence over content neutrality. India Today reported that the government questioned whether Wikipedia should continue being classified as an intermediary or be held accountable as a publisher.
• Mojid, Muhammad Ibrahim (February 25, 2025). "Sylheti Wikipedia starts its journey". Dhaka Tribune. Retrieved February 25, 2025. On February 14, the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and language committee approved the proposal of Sylheti Wikipedia.

March

• Rowe, Willa (March 1, 2025). "This free interactive museum lets you explore Wikipedia like never before". Digital Trends. Retrieved March 14, 2025. That feeling of getting lost in the information rabbit hole is a quintessential Wikipedia experience that most people are familiar with.
• Dunbar, Jon (March 3, 2025). "Wikipedia list sheds light on Korea's historic restaurants". The Korea Times. Retrieved March 10, 2025. He added that he prefers to keep his anonymity because he sometimes writes on contentious topics. He cited a massive defamation lawsuit filed last year by the government of India against the Wikimedia Foundation, and a more recent report about the conservative U.S. Heritage Foundation's plans to "identify and target" volunteer editors on Wikipedia.
• Talbot, Margaret (March 4, 2025). "Elon Musk Also Has a Problem with Wikipedia". The New Yorker. Retrieved March 4, 2025. But Wikipedia has proved remarkably resilient. Wales has stressed that the site is not for sale. And for two decades, a long time in tech years, it has stayed true to its crowdsourced, democratic ethos and to its commitment to facts. In 2025 America, that counts as a beacon of hope.
• Templer Olaiya, Tope (March 5, 2025). "On IWD, Wikimedia Foundation celebrates contributors closing gender gaps on Wikipedia". The Guardian. Retrieved March 6, 2025. Wikipedia depends on the availability of existing published sources to verify the facts in its articles. But, because women have been left out of historical narratives and traditional sources of knowledge, many of these knowledge gaps are present on Wikipedia.
• Ramirez, Martha (March 6, 2025). "Who's Funding Wikipedia and Why Is It Under Attack?". Inside Philanthropy. Retrieved March 6, 2025. As these attacks continue, it's more important than ever for funders to continue supporting and safeguarding organizations that foster learning. Only then can we ensure that in the future, Wikipedia, and free knowledge on the web in general, don't share the fate of the great Library of Alexandria.
• Murphy, Margi (March 7, 2025). "Wikipedia Roiled With Internal Strife Over Page Edits About the Middle East". Bloomberg News. Retrieved March 7, 2025. Ongoing war and other conflicts in the Middle East have spilled onto the pages of the online encyclopedia Wikipedia, where volunteer editors who maintain the website are sparring over how to frame recent events. At least 14 editors have been barred from working on pages related to the topic, Jewish organizations are claiming bias, and the conflict has reached the top levels of Wikipedia as the site's two founders, Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger, are at odds over whether to unmask the anonymous editors involved in the turmoil.
• Parks, Kristine (March 7, 2025). "Wikipedia co-founder calls on Elon Musk to investigate government influence over online encyclopedia". Fox News. Retrieved March 7, 2025. With the new Trump administration's goal to tackle waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government, Sanger sees a prime opportunity for DOGE to take another look at Wikipedia. He believes there's evidence to raise questions about potential government influence on the website and warned there could be foreign influence from China or Russia on the website as well.
• Mcclure, Gwen (March 7, 2025). "Wikipedia, a surprising repository of fact". Radio New Zealand. Retrieved March 7, 2025. Every second, more than 8000 people read Wikipedia. Every minute, there are about 350 edits to the site. It's the most-read reference ever. This, of course, is according to Wikipedia - a sentence that would have been unlikely to appear in an article even a few years ago. But in a world where Meta has removed fact-checkers and AI gives laughably inaccurate answers, Wikipedia has emerged as a surprisingly reliable and increasingly respected source of information.
• Ferran-Ferrer, Núria (March 7, 2025). "Wikipedia has a huge gender equality problem – here's why it matters". The Conversation. Retrieved March 7, 2025. As we mark International Women's Day, it's high time we examined the barriers that keep Wikipedia from achieving true equity, and the efforts being made to close this digital divide.
• "Want to learn how to contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia?". Times of Malta. March 8, 2025. Retrieved March 9, 2025. The initiative is part of a longer-term collaboration between Times of Malta and Wikimedia Community Malta which sees academic Toni Sant serve as Times of Malta's Wikimedian-in-Residence. As part of that collaboration, Times of Malta will be making a number of photos from its historic photo library available on Wikipedia for public use under a Creative Commons Licence.
• Roscoe, Jules (March 10, 2025). "Photographers Are on a Mission to Fix Wikipedia's Famously Bad Celebrity Portraits". 404 Media. Retrieved March 10, 2025. This portrait problem stems from Wikipedia's mission to provide free reliable information. All media on the site must be openly licensed, so that anyone can use it free of charge. That, in turn, means that most photos of notable people on the site are of notably poor quality.
• Mayron, Sapeer (March 11, 2025). "Wikimedians, unite: The people ensuring NZ's stories are on Wikipedia". The Post. Retrieved March 18, 2025. Auckland Museum has been working alongside Wikipedia for a while, but especially closely since 2020. Their team keeps track of how often articles about their collections are looked at online: 60 million views a year on Wikipedia, compared with 600,000 on the museum's own website.
• Merid, Feven (March 13, 2025). "Wikipedia's Reluctant Resisters". Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved March 18, 2025. But if the common feeling in the room was that Wikipedia wasn't under existential threat, the editors still felt vulnerable.
• Nair, Pooja (March 13, 2025). "Malayalam finds a place in Wikipedia's article writing contest on Islamic heritage". The New Indian Express. Retrieved March 18, 2025. Wikipedia's goal: 5,000 new articles. But beyond the numbers, the project is about preserving heritage and making knowledge accessible to all.
• Jamal, Ummar (March 17, 2025). "Courts have to be tolerant: Supreme Court on Delhi HC's takedown order against Wikipedia in ANI case". Bar and Bench. Retrieved March 18, 2025. The issue arose after ANI sued Wikipedia for defamation alleging that the platform allowed defamatory edits by certain users referring to the news agency as a "propaganda tool" for the present Central government.
• hrivastava, Amisha (March 17, 2025). ""Why Touchy About Comments On Court Proceedings?" Supreme Court On Delhi HC Order To Remove Wikipedia Page On ANI's Defamation Suit". LiveLaw.in. Retrieved March 18, 2025. Subsequently, on November 11, 2024, the Delhi High Court closed Wikimedia's appeal against the single judge's order directing disclosure of the individuals' subscriber details. This came after both parties entered into a consent order resolving the matter.
• "'The question is about freedom of media': SC issues notice to ANI after Wikipedia plea". Newslaundry. March 17, 2025. Retrieved March 18, 2025. In October, the Delhi High Court described Wikipedia's model as "dangerous", complaining that "anyone can edit a page". It also ordered the take down of a Wikipedia page titled "Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation" which contains details on the ongoing case.
• "Editing for Hate: How Anti-Israel and Anti-Jewish Bias Undermines Wikipedia's Neutrality". Anti-Defamation League. March 18, 2025. Retrieved March 18, 2025. ADL has found clear evidence that a group of at least 30 editors circumvent Wikipedia's policies in concert to introduce antisemitic narratives, anti-Israel bias, and misleading information.
• Deutch, Gabby (March 18, 2025). "ADL report finds 'malicious' Wikipedia editors conspired to impose anti-Israel bias across site". The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles. Retrieved March 20, 2025. On pages dedicated to major historical events, like several Israel-Arab wars or peace negotiations, editors would make "extensive edits" in "tone, content and perspective" to advance an anti-Israel narrative, the report found.
• Weiss, Debbie (March 18, 2025). "'Malicious' Wikipedia Editors Manipulated Site's Coverage of Israel, ADL Report Alleges". Algemeiner Journal. Retrieved March 20, 2025. The ADL report did not call for abandoning Wikipedia but warned users to be skeptical of politically sensitive entries.
• Starr, Michael (March 18, 2025). "Wikipedia editor clique adding anti-Israel, antisemitic bias to pages, ADL study finds". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved March 20, 2025. The ADL said editors appeared to coordinate changing relevant pages, downplaying Palestinian antisemitism, violence, and calls to destroy Israel, and adding more criticism of Israel.
• Rosenberg, Michelle (March 19, 2025). "Wikipedia launches review after report alleges anti-Israel editorial manipulation". Jewish News. Retrieved March 20, 2025. Speaking to Jewish News, a spokesperson at the Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit that operates Wikipedia said: ... "Though our preliminary review of this report finds troubling and flawed conclusions that are not supported by the Anti-Defamation League's data, we are currently undertaking a more thorough and detailed analysis. It is unfortunate that we were not asked to provide context that might have helped allay some of the concerns raised."
• Schneider, Dan; Olohan, Tom (March 19, 2025). "How biased Wikipedia trashed Trump's nominees — after he named them". New York Post. Retrieved March 20, 2025. In its latest act of partisan truth-twisting, Wikipedia took a blowtorch to the reputations of President Donald Trump's nominees for his Cabinet. The partisan ploy failed to derail them, but it exposed the sinister agenda that informs everything the online encyclopedia touches.
• Duffy, Clare (March 20, 2025). "The ADL says Wikipedia contains antisemitic bias, amid dispute over how the Israel-Hamas conflict is represented on the site". CNN. Retrieved March 21, 2025. Since that decision, "the ADL has continued to misrepresent Wikipedia's well-established guidelines, policies, and enforcement mechanisms that effectively address the issues outlined in the report and its recommendations," the Wikimedia Foundation said in its statement.
• Domanick, Andrea (March 21, 2025). "Wikipedia volunteers aim to preserve the history of L.A. landmarks destroyed in fires". NPR. Retrieved March 22, 2025. For five hours, two dozen or so volunteers congregate over laptops, cups of coffee and doughnuts iced with the Wikipedia logo. They're writing new entries for places lost in the fires, adding citations, updating information and uploading photos.
• Khan, Feroz (March 22, 2025). "The Heroic Photographers Fixing Bad Celeb Portraits On Wikipedia". The Phoblographer. Retrieved March 22, 2025. Have you ever wondered why there's a sea of differences between the celebrity portraits seen on IMDb as compared to those on Wikipedia? It turns out many of us have been scratching our heads over the same.
• "Assam: Wikipedia workshop on Assamese held at Bodoland University". The Sentinel. March 22, 2025. Retrieved March 22, 2025. The workshop covered various topics, including basic training on page editing, creating articles on Wikipedia, incorporating references, and understanding Wikipedia's layout and formatting. Thirty-seven students and researchers participated in the event.
• Singh, Brijesh (March 23, 2025). "Deconstructing Wikipedia: It's biased, lopsided and partisan". The Sunday Guardian. Retrieved March 22, 2025. For example, discussions about Hindu religious practices frequently center around Western feminist or secular critiques rather than incorporating viewpoints from Hindu practitioners themselves. This creates a situation where content about Hinduism may emphasize aspects like caste systems or gender inequalities while minimizing its philosophical depth or cultural significance to Indian society.
• Bandler, Aaron (March 25, 2025). "Wikipedia Editors Blacklist Heritage Foundation Following Report of Plan to Unmask Antisemitic Editors". The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles. Retrieved March 26, 2025. In response to The Forward article, Wikipedia editors launched a discussion known as Request for Comment (RfC) on Jan. 8 how editors should treat the think tank's reliability going forward.
• "Wikipedia Edit-a-thon: Enhancing the Discoverability of Women's History". Smithsonian Institution. March 25, 2025. Retrieved March 26, 2025. Wikipedia is a vital link within the network of online information. Women with articles in Wikipedia are easier to find. We'll boost the discoverability of these women by creating and editing articles in Wikipedia. Help us share the stories of women musicians, fiber artists, journalists, doctors and more.
• Tremayne-Pengelly, Alexandra (March 28, 2025). "Wikipedia Built the Internet's Brain. Now Its Leaders Want Credit". The New York Observer. Retrieved March 29, 2025. As Wikipedia becomes more central to the infrastructure A.I., the organization is grappling with rising bot traffic, the need for attribution and how to sustain its ecosystem in the face of powerful new users.
• Fraser, Graham (March 29, 2025). "Amateur photographers hope to fix Wikipedia's 'terrible' pictures". BBC. Retrieved March 29, 2025. Some enthusiasts launched WikiPortraits, a project to recruit a group of volunteer photographers around the world and get them accreditation to attend film festivals, conferences and other events.
• "Wikipedia vs ADL continues: Report claims dangerous bias, urge policymakers to act quickly before..." The Times of India. March 31, 2025. Retrieved March 31, 2025. The tension traces back to last year when Wikipedia editors deemed the ADL "generally unreliable" on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict due to its dual advocacy and research roles, though still "generally reliable" elsewhere.

April

• "The Depths of Wikipedia Bluesky account is a treasure trove of trivia – 22 favourites". The Poke. April 1, 2025. Retrieved April 1, 2025. Over on Bluesky, the Depths of Wikipedia account curates some absolute treasures from the open-collaboration encyclopaedia.
• Thapliyal, Nupur (April 2, 2025). "Delhi High Court Orders Removal Of Allegedly Defamatory Description Of ANI On Its Wikipedia Page". LiveLaw. Retrieved April 2, 2025. In its suit against Wikimedia Foundation and its officials, ANI has said that the former has allegedly published palpably false and defamatory content with malicious intent of tarnishing the news agency's reputation and to discredit its goodwill.
• "Delhi High Court orders Wikipedia to remove edits on ANI page". Newslaundry. April 2, 2025. Retrieved April 2, 2025. In October, the Delhi High Court had described Wikipedia's model as "dangerous", complaining that "anyone can edit a page". It also ordered the take down of a Wikipedia page titled "Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation" which contains details on the ongoing case. Wikipedia took the page down but also moved the Supreme Court.
• Kan, Michael (April 2, 2025). "Wikipedia Faces Flood of AI Bots That Are Eating Bandwidth, Raising Costs". PCMag. Retrieved April 2, 2025. In response, Wikipedia's site managers have imposed "case-by-case" rate limiting for the offending AI crawlers, or even banned them. But to address the problem over the long-term, the Wikimedia Foundation is developing a "Responsible Use of Infrastructure" plan, which notes the network strain from AI bot scrapers is "unsustainable."
• Claburn, Thomas (April 3, 2025). "Wikipedia's overlords bemoan AI bot bandwidth burden". The Register. Retrieved June 22, 2025. Web-scraping bots have become an unsupportable burden for the Wikimedia community due to their insatiable appetite for online content to train AI models. Representatives from the Wikimedia Foundation, which oversees Wikipedia and similar community-based projects, say that since January 2024, the bandwidth spent serving requests for multimedia files has increased by 50 percent.
• Ghosh, Sohini (April 4, 2025). "In a first, Delhi High Court directs Wikipedia to remove 'defamatory' content on news agency ANI". The Indian Express. Retrieved April 4, 2025. "Defendant No.1 [Wikimedia Foundation Inc] professes itself to be an encyclopaedia and people at large have a tendency to accept the statements made on the web pages of Defendant No.1 as gospel truth. The responsibility, therefore, of Defendant No.1 is higher," [the court] stated.
• Chaturvedi, Arpan (April 4, 2025). "Wikimedia must remove India content deemed defamatory, court rules". Reuters. Retrieved April 4, 2025. Last year the agency, ANI, sued Wikimedia for defamation in the Delhi High Court, citing a Wikipedia description that it faced criticism for being a government "propaganda tool" and sought removal of such statements.
• Boller, Jay (April 4, 2025). "Disbanded in 2019, MN's Wikipedia Editors Are Gathering Once Again: 'We Need People'". Racket (Minnesota). Retrieved April 5, 2025. Recently, the 30-ish folks behind the Wikimedians of Minnesota User Group have resurrected their meetups. It's an effort to better curate entries related to the state and geek-out on the minutia of online information chronicling, but it's also a great excuse to snack on stuffed sausage dates while sipping beers at Lake Monster Brewing Co., as they'll do this coming Sunday.
• Hsu, Jeremu (April 4, 2025). "AI data scrapers are an existential threat to Wikipedia". New Scientist. Retrieved April 5, 2025. The non-profit Wikimedia Foundation, which operates Wikipedia, says since January 2024 it has seen a 50 per cent increase in network traffic requesting image and video downloads from its catalogue.
• "Wikipedia operator appeals Indian court's order to remove content, sources say". Reuters. April 7, 2025. Retrieved April 7, 2025. The Wikimedia Foundation is the second major tech platform, following X, to become embroiled in Indian court battles over orders to take down content in recent years.
• Thapliyal, Nupur (April 7, 2025). "Wikipedia Moves Delhi High Court Against Order To Take Down Allegedly 'Defamatory' Content On ANI, Hearing Tomorrow". LiveLaw.in. Retrieved April 7, 2025. The single judge had observed that Wikipedia cannot wash its hands of the contents published on it by merely claiming that it is an intermediary and cannot be held responsible for the statements published on the platform. Perusing ANI's Wikipedia page, the Court had said that the statements on it were all sourced from articles which were nothing but editorials and opinionated pages.
• "Tragedy of a commons: on Wikimedia and the free flow of information". The Hindu. April 7, 2025. Retrieved April 7, 2025. Unlike newspapers or scientific journals, the encyclopedia does not purport to publish new information; volunteers are instead expected to repeat with attribution or reproduce with references, information originally published elsewhere, with a preference for reputable sources. In this light, the court order is problematic.
• Reji, Blessy (April 8, 2025). "Wikipedia vs ANI: The legal battle so far". The Economic Times. Retrieved April 8, 2025. ANI argued that, as a public platform, Wikipedia should not possess the same freedoms as a private company. It also criticised the platform for restricting the page, which prevents the news agency from making edits while allowing Wikipedia editors to do so.
• "Remove defamatory content about ANI, Delhi HC tells Wikipedia". The Hindu. April 9, 2025. Retrieved April 9, 2025. On Tuesday, the court observed that Wikipedia is regarded as an encyclopedia and should maintain neutrality and not take sides like a blog.
• Singh, Nandini (April 10, 2025). "ANI vs Wikipedia: What the case is about and what has happened so far". Business Standard. Retrieved April 12, 2025. Wikipedia, which allows for user-generated modifications supported by credible sources, defended itself by citing its community moderation model and neutrality policy.
• "Maharashtra Cyber urges Centre to block Wikipedia, Proton Mail". Hindustan Times. April 12, 2025. Retrieved April 12, 2025. The cyber cell then issued a stern warning to Wikipedia, warning that failure to comply could result in its services being blocked in India under Section 69A of the IT Act.
• Hosie, William (April 12, 2025). "Is Wikipedia in trouble?". Evening Standard. Retrieved April 12, 2025. But Wikipedia has, increasingly, found itself at odds with the world. The rise of autocracy and totalitarianism last year means a growing number of governments are looking to control what Wikipedia says about them, while a global turn against traditional institutions has weakened trust in the website – which many see as a mouthpiece for legacy media.
• Harrison, Stephen (April 12, 2025). "How Trump's Stock Market Chaos Is Dividing Wikipedia". Slate. Retrieved April 12, 2025. Editors have starkly different views of what Wikipedia is and how it best serves readers.
• Phiddian, Ellen (April 15, 2025). "Wikipedia's largest non-English version was created by a bot. Generative AI poses new problems". Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved April 19, 2025. Dr Johansson designed a program, dubbed "lsjbot", which generated millions of articles in several languages, but particularly Cebuano. It also laid bare a debate which Wikipedia has been grappling with since its inception, and which artificial intelligence (AI) is making ever more pressing.
• Weatherbed, Jess (April 17, 2025). "Wikipedia is giving AI developers its data to fend off bot scrapers". The Verge. Retrieved April 19, 2025. Wikipedia is attempting to dissuade artificial intelligence developers from scraping the platform by releasing a dataset that's specifically optimized for training AI models.
• Choudhury, Ritwik (April 17, 2025). "Relief for Wikipedia as Supreme Court sets aside Delhi High Court order to take down defamatory edits against ANI". Bar and Bench. Retrieved April 19, 2025. The High Court issued summons to Wikipedia on July 9, 2024 and ordered it to disclose information about three people who made the edits on ANI's Wikipedia page. The order was resisted by Wikipedia, which itself chose to serve notices on these users instead of disclosing their identity in public.
• Schneider, Dan; Jackson, Jerris (April 17, 2025). "Sneak attack: How biased Wikipedia twisted the truth about JD Vance". New York Post. Retrieved April 19, 2025. No longer a straightforward source of facts, Wikipedia today is pure left-wing propaganda — and its intense campaign against Vice President JD Vance is just the latest example of its bias.
• Mauran, Cecily (April 19, 2025). "Wikipedia has a solution for the deluge of AI training bots hogging its servers". Mashable. Retrieved April 19, 2025. According to Ars Technica, bots that scrape Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons pages have consumed 50 percent of its bandwidth, putting a massive strain on the nonprofit's entire operation.
• "A welcome move: On Wikipedia and Supreme Court order". The Hindu. April 19, 2025. Retrieved April 19, 2025. In asking for the takedown of articles by interpreting critical information as defamation and by even threatening penal action against Wikipedia, judicial actions could unwittingly lead to the stifling of open discussion of entities on the encyclopaedia, thereby acting against the interest of the free flow of information.
• Kaminsky, Gabe (April 25, 2025). "Exclusive: Trump's D.C. Prosecutor Threatens Wikipedia's Tax-Exempt Status". The Free Press. Retrieved April 26, 2025. The letter, which was obtained by The Free Press, accused the largest online encyclopedia of "allowing foreign actors to manipulate information and spread propaganda to the American public."
• Oremus, Will; Mark, Julian (April 25, 2025). "U.S. attorney for D.C. accuses Wikipedia of 'propaganda,' threatens nonprofit status". The Washington Post. Retrieved April 26, 2025. While Wikipedia has weathered occasional controversies throughout its history over the content of its articles, its emergence as a bogeyman of U.S. conservatives is relatively recent. In 2018, an Atlantic column dubbed it "the last bastion of shared reality" in an ever more polarized country.
• Chapman, Matthew (April 25, 2025). "'Subverting America': Trump DOJ official declares war on 'propaganda' peddler — Wikipedia". Raw Story. Retrieved April 26, 2025. Martin went on to complain that the Wikimedia board is "composed primarily of foreign nationals" who are "subverting the interests of American taxpayers."
• Roth, Emma (April 26, 2025). "Trump DOJ goon threatens Wikipedia". The Verge. Retrieved April 26, 2025. Martin's letter reflects a broader trend of the right targeting Wikipedia.
• Singh, Rohit (April 28, 2025). "Wikipedia Tax-Exempt Status at Risk As US Attorney Demands Transparency on Content Moderation". MediaNama. Retrieved April 28, 2025. Globally, Wikipedia has come under scrutiny from various governments. In Saudi Arabia, the government imprisoned two Wikipedia editors on charges of "swaying public opinion." In Turkey, Wikipedia was blocked entirely for nearly three years over content critical of the government until the country's highest court ruled the ban unconstitutional.
• Kehnemui, Sharon (April 28, 2025). "U.S. Attorney Targets Wikipedia for Disinformation, Spread of Propaganda by Foreign Sources". The New York Sun. Retrieved April 28, 2025. Mr. Martin said Wikipedia's operations are directed by a board composed primarily of foreign nationals "subverting the interests of American taxpayers." He said that its mission as a neutral educational resource is benefiting "foreign powers," and its tax-exempt status could be at risk for violating its "legal obligations and fiduciary duties."
• Dye, Liz (April 28, 2025). "DC Prosecutor Ed Martin Goes After Wikipedia For Exercising First Amendment Rights". Above the Law. Retrieved April 29, 2025. The letter was cordial, if ridiculous. But on social media, Martin was (even) less professional. "Hey @Wikipedia: you can run but you can't hide!" he tweeted, linking to a post on his own letter.
• Walker, Corey (April 28, 2025). "Wikipedia Nonprofit Status Under Scrutiny From US Justice Department Amid Claims of Systemic Anti-Israel Bias". Algemeiner Journal. Retrieved April 29, 2025. The cohort of Wikipedia editors has softened the image of Islamist terrorist groups such as Hamas through removing any mention of their 1988 charter, which calls for the complete massacre of Jews and elimination of Israel. The editors also edited an article on Zionism, describing the movement for Jewish self-determination as "an ethnocultural nationalist movement" which was "pursued through the colonization of Palestine."
• Paul, Ari (April 30, 2025). "Feds Threaten Wikipedia After Right-Wing Media Uproar". ScheerPost. Retrieved April 30, 2025. One might ask, "Who cares if Wikipedia is biased?" Lots of media are biased in one direction or another. And the notion that any nonprofit organization's political leaning requires its status be investigated is ludicrous, considering that three of the organizations hyping Wikipedia's alleged wrongdoing—the Heritage Foundation, the Manhattan Institute and the ADL—have the same tax-exempt status.

May

• Goldberg, Yitz (May 1, 2025). "Members of Congress call on Wikipedia to curb its antisemitism". Arutz Sheva. Retrieved May 1, 2025. The letter follows recent ADL research that found widespread antisemitic and anti-Israel bias on its pages, across multiple languages, especially on content related to Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as well as an apparent coordinated promotion of pro-Hamas propaganda.
• Bandler, Aaron (May 1, 2025). "23 Congressional Members Express Concern to Wikimedia Foundation Over "Potential Abuse of Wikipedia by Coordinated Actors"". The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles. Retrieved May 2, 2025. The letter highlighted how the report documented instances in which these editors scrubbed the Wikipedia pages of certain public figures' support for terrorism and antisemitism and that the Hamas Wikipedia page whitewashes Hamas' terror activities.
• Zoom, Doktor (May 3, 2025). "Donald Trump Trying To Kill NPR, PBS, Wikipedia, Puppies, Everything Else You Like". Wonkette. Retrieved May 3, 2025. But the rightwing obsession with going after public media and Wikipedia isn't solely about wanting to consolidate control over information. Like so many Trumpian culture-war "policies," it's driven by a deep well of resentment and revenge, a desire to get even with the snooty elites who must be punished for liking things that Real Americans don't.
• Merlin, Chad (May 3, 2025). "US jurist accuses Wikipedia of 'disseminating propaganda' and 'rewriting history'". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved May 5, 2025. Aharoni Lir revealed that interviews with 16 Jewish English Wikipedia editors had raised major concerns about the "difficulty, and at times impossibility, of correcting biased content directed against Israel," a problem she said had "notably intensified since October 7."
• Bandler, Aaron (May 5, 2025). "Wikipedia's Supreme Court Bans Two Editors for Offsite Misconduct in Israel-Palestine Topic Area". The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles. Retrieved May 5, 2025. In their announcement, the committee said it had reviewed a 244-page dossier that The Journal published in the "Gaming the Wiki System" cover story chronicling the purported activities of the Wikipedia channel in the Tech for Palestine Discord server.
• Donahue, Bill (May 5, 2025). "Jay-Z Says Rape Accuser's Attorney Edited Wikipedia Pages to Harm His Reputation". Billboard. Retrieved May 7, 2025. "In violation of Wikipedia's rules, Buzbee directed his employees to edit Wikipedia pages to enhance Buzbee's image and damage Mr. Carter's and Roc Nation's reputations," Jay-Z's attorneys write in the amended complaint.
• Fried, Ina (May 6, 2025). "Exclusive: Wikimedia CEO is leaving". Axios. Retrieved May 6, 2025. I will remain in my role until a new CEO is in place," Iskander said in the note. "The hope is to welcome a successor by January 2026, a milestone that coincides with Wikipedia's 25th anniversary.
• Socha, Miles (May 7, 2025). "Wikipedia Has Put a Few Precious Words on T-shirts". Women's Wear Daily. Retrieved May 7, 2025. The Cologne-based firm has cooked up a collaboration with the Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit that operates Wikipedia and has found itself in the crosshairs of U.S. President Donald Trump and Tesla founder Elon Musk in recent months.
• Milmo, Dan (May 8, 2025). "Wikipedia challenging UK law it says exposes it to 'manipulation and vandalism'". The Guardian. Retrieved May 8, 2025. The charity that hosts Wikipedia is challenging the UK's online safety legislation in the high court, saying some of its regulations would expose the site to "manipulation and vandalism".
• Vallance, Chris (May 8, 2025). "Wikipedia legally challenges 'flawed' online safety rules". BBC. Retrieved May 8, 2025. Lead counsel Phil Bradley-Schmieg said it was "unfortunate that we must now defend the privacy and safety of Wikipedia's volunteer editors from flawed legislation". The government told the BBC it was committed to implementing the act but could not comment on ongoing legal proceedings.
• Ro, Crystal (May 8, 2025). "There Are A LOT Of Horrifying Wikipedia Pages About Missing Persons, What's One You Can't Stop Thinking About?". BuzzFeed. Retrieved May 9, 2025. Well, true crime experts, now it's your turn to share. What's the scariest Wikipedia page about a missing person (or persons) you've ever read?
• Roy, Debayan (May 9, 2025). "Win for Wikipedia as Supreme Court quashes Delhi High Court's order to takedown page on ANI v Wiki case". Bar and Bench. Retrieved May 9, 2025. We have no hesitation to hold that the direction issued by the High Court could not have been issued, the top court said.
• Srivastava, Bhavini (May 9, 2025). "Second round of ANI vs. Wikipedia begins before Delhi High Court". Bar and Bench. Retrieved May 9, 2025. The High Court today issued notice to Wikimedia Foundation (owner of Wikipedia) on a fresh application moved by ANI for an interim injunction against alleged defamatory content on Wikipedia's page about ANI. Justice Jyoti Singh heard the case today and issued notice to Wikipedia before listing the matter for further hearing on July 7.
• Chaturvedi, Arpan (May 9, 2025). "India Supreme Court reverses content takedown order against Wikipedia operator". Reuters. Retrieved May 9, 2025. The Supreme Court said the takedown order was the result of the high court reacting "disproportionately." "Courts, as a public and open institution, must always remain open to public observations, debates and criticisms," the 37-page Supreme Court order said.
• Stevens, Rhiannon (May 11, 2025). "Can Wikipedia survive the rise of AI and Trump?". ABC News (Australia). Retrieved May 12, 2025. But he stops short of calling it a shared reality. Wikipedia is not a place where you're "just seeing your preferential version of things served up to you as a delicious piece of confirmation bias," he says. "[But] there will be people who just reject Wikipedia out of hand when it doesn't conform with their concept of reality."
• Fried, Ina (May 12, 2025). "Interview: Wikipedia weathers AI, political storms". Axios. Retrieved May 12, 2025. Iskander also sees lessons in Wikipedia's approach for AI companies as they seek to mitigate bias, reduce errors and ensure a healthy information ecosystem.
• Carolan, Mary (May 12, 2025). "Authors of paper claiming Irish judges use Wikipedia as a source for rulings dispute 'flawed' research criticisms". The Irish Times. Retrieved May 12, 2025. The original paper was published in 2022 and was criticised in a subsequent study published in May 2023, co-authored by High Court judge Mr Justice Richard Humphreys, which said citations in judgments are driven mainly by legal submissions and maintained there was no "Wikipedia effect".
• Bhattar, Ruchi (May 12, 2025). "Why Supreme Court reversed Delhi High Court's Wikipedia page takedown order in ANI defamation case". Scroll.in. Retrieved May 13, 2025. Hearing Wikimedia's Special Leave Petition (SLP), the bench firmly rejected the HC's interpretation and its broad directive.
• Kartikeya, Kumar (May 12, 2025). "Drawing a line in the sand: SC judgment reaffirms right to free speech". The Indian Express. Retrieved May 13, 2025. In conclusion, the Wikipedia v ANI decision is not merely a win for one online platform, it draws a line in the sand. The Supreme Court has reminded lower courts and litigants alike that judicial power must be exercised with restraint, especially in matters concerning speech.
• "Wikipedia Changes Entries On Indian News Channels After Report Points To Bias". ABP News. May 14, 2025. Retrieved May 14, 2025. Wikipedia has edited out the 'disparaging' parts of the pages on Indian news channels following a news report that called out the website's alleged bias. Wikipedia, in its profiles of leading news channels in India, allegedly labelled them as close to the BJP and stated that the channels reported in favour of the ruling party.
• Hein, Rachel (May 14, 2025). "Wikipedia Once Again Asking for $1 in Exchange For Teaching You Everything You've Ever Learned". The Hard Times. Retrieved May 14, 2025. [Wikipedia] is run completely on the goodwill and hyperfixation disorders of complete randos out there. I really have no idea how this place runs, but it's been too long for me to ask. People have always trusted me because of how I look and I can't ruin that by asking questions. Regardless, we have other stuff we need money for that you don't know about. Just trust me, okay?
• Palmer, Kathryn (May 15, 2025). "'Nonsense Detectives' Give Academic Resources New Life Online". Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved May 21, 2025. The two-year residency pilot program is a partnership between CUNY and Wikimedia New York City, and funded by Craig Newmark, founder of Craigslist and namesake of CUNY's journalism school.
• Klein, Shira (May 16, 2025). "Is Wikipedia a cesspool of antisemitism? Don't trust the ADL's answer". The Forward. Retrieved May 17, 2025. The attacks by the ADL and Congress on Wikipedia purport to protect Jews, but in fact have nothing to do with antisemitism, and everything to do with controlling the narrative about Israel. But Wikipedia's processes around that narrative are admirable in their strenuous research.
• "New ESISC Report Exposes Systemic Failures in Wikipedia's Governance and the Growing Risks of Disinformation". Business Wire. May 20, 2025. Retrieved May 21, 2025. The authors argue that Wikipedia's structure increasingly mirrors that of a social media platform rather than a neutral and reliable information source.
• Micale, Jennifer (May 20, 2025). "Open source: How a classroom assignment can help improve Wikipedia". BingUNews. Retrieved May 23, 2025. True story: Stoever Googled "How to use Wikipedia in your classroom," which led her to Wiki Education. She applied, and within weeks, the organization built a dashboard for her class, assigned students a Wikipedia expert as a guide, and gave the professor her own mentor, along with online talks and events throughout the semester.
• Thrush, Glenn; Feuer, Alan (May 21, 2025). "If Justice Dept. Can't Prosecute Trump's Foes, It Will 'Shame' Them, Official Says". The New York Times. Retrieved May 21, 2025. At another point, Mr. Martin said he viewed himself as being engaged in a "war over information." He cited a letter he had written to Wikipedia accusing it of bias and improperly shielding itself from scrutiny through its tax-exempt status.
• Grabowski, Jan (May 21, 2025). "Contrary to recent op-ed's conclusions, ADL report on antisemitism on Wikipedia is accurate". The Forward. Retrieved May 21, 2025. If anything, the ADL report downplays our findings, which point to the pervasive presence of antisemitism on the Wikipedia pages we analyzed.
• Good, Anna (May 22, 2025). "We already know what the last-ever Wikipedia article and edit will be, claims viral theory". The Daily Dot. Retrieved May 23, 2025. These existential questions resonated with viewers, with his TikTok video reaching over 331.9K views and 31.8K likes. After all, most people take the internet's most trusted encyclopedia for granted.
• Merlin, Ohad (May 22, 2025). "Five points for the Nakba: PA involved in contest for creation of Palestinian-biased Wiki articles". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved May 23, 2025. In other words, a government-sanctioned organization is being platformed by the Wikipedia website to redact content with strong political undertones – promising to reimburse the winners with what appears to be governmental allocated funds.
• Tangermann, Victor (May 22, 2025). "Terrifying Survey Claims ChatGPT Has Overtaken Wikipedia". Futurism. Retrieved May 24, 2025. While Wikipedia has never been known to be an infallible source free of bias or inaccuracies, generative AI has proven to be far more unreliable, thanks to widespread hallucinations and biases present in its training data.
• Mohammed-Nurudeen, Mahmud (May 25, 2025). "AfroCuration Ghana 2025 unites 7 Ghanaian languages to promote African identity on Wikipedia". Myjoyonline. Retrieved May 26, 2025. We have over 2,000 African languages, yet our voices are missing on the Internet. While Swahili is making remarkable strides, other languages must rise too. Wikipedia is a powerful tool for digital inclusion, and we are here to change the narrative.

June

• Smith, Eugene (June 3, 2025). "Who writes Trump's Wikipedia page? Meet the 'edit warriors'". The Times. Retrieved June 4, 2025. Elon Musk tweeted in 2023 that it had a "non-trivial left-wing tilt" and joked it should rename itself "Wokipedia". Conservative commentators have echoed similar criticisms, saying it takes its information disproportionately from "left-wing" media, and one study published last year suggested its editors wrote more positively of Democratic figures than Republican ones.
• Bandler, Aaron (June 6, 2025). "Taking Sides: Wikipedia Advances Anti-Israel Narratives". RealClearInvestigations. Retrieved June 7, 2025. Although Wikipedia credits its volunteer editing for making it a vast encyclopedia with tens of millions of pages, it lacks the policies and tools to achieve neutrality on hotly contested topics like the Israel-Palestine conflict, according to a third editor who requested anonymity.
• Smith, Robyn; Kačerauskas, Mantas (June 10, 2025). "40 Hilarious Wikipedia Entries That Could Have Been Crafted By Comedians (New Pics)". Bored Panda. Retrieved June 11, 2025.
• Maiberg, Emanuel (June 11, 2025). "Wikipedia Pauses AI-Generated Summaries After Editor Backlash". 404 Media. Retrieved June 12, 2025. The Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit organization which hosts and develops Wikipedia, has paused an experiment that showed users AI-generated summaries at the top of articles after an overwhelmingly negative reaction from the Wikipedia editors community.
• Whitwham, Ryan (June 11, 2025). ""Yuck": Wikipedia pauses AI summaries after editor revolt". Ars Technica. Retrieved June 20, 2025. Even Wikipedia, the vast repository of knowledge famously maintained by an army of volunteer human editors, is looking to add robots to the mix. The site began testing AI summaries in some articles over the past week, but the project has been frozen after editors voiced their opinions. And that opinion is: "yuck."
• Walker, John (June 20, 2025). "Wikipedia Is The Latest Place To Join The Daily Gaming Craze". Kotaku. When trying to find out more information about Wikipedia's game, not least whether I'm embarrassingly late to discovering it or one of the first to be offered it, I find there's the weirdest lack of information out there.
• Bandler, Aaron (June 23, 2025). "'Recurring trend': Wikipedia demoting pro-Israel content, experts say". Jewish News Syndicate. Retrieved June 30, 2025. "The decision reflects a growing trend, in which Wikipedia undermines its foundational principles of neutrality and open knowledge by failing to disclose facts related to sensitive topics and actively concealing them, especially regarding subjects related to Israel," Lir said.
• O'Connell, Mark (June 29, 2025). "I love Wikipedia so much, I hardly even minded when it killed me off". The Irish Times. Retrieved June 30, 2025. There is something ennobling, in other words, about the whole project – in all its vastness and eccentricity and frivolity and grandeur – just as there is something ennobling about democracy. The greatest thing about Wikipedia, of course, is that it works exceptionally well.

July

• Pachal, Pete (July 1, 2025). "Inside Wikipedia's AI revolt—and what it means for the media". Fast Company. Retrieved July 6, 2025. Sure, the scale of the reaction might feel over the top, but the instinct behind it is easy to grasp.
• Bandler, Aaron (July 2, 2025). "Wikipedia citing anti-Israel group 'outrageous, not surprising,' say nonprofits the site shuns". Jewish News Syndicate. Retrieved July 6, 2025. "This is exactly the problem with the absence of fairness and standards in websites like this," Daniel S. Mariaschin, CEO of B'nai B'rith International, told JNS.
• Bauer, Valentin; Bernau, Patrick; Herstell, Christopher; Kramer, Jacob (July 5, 2025). "Wikipedia weiß immer weniger" [Wikipedia knows less and less]. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (in German). Retrieved July 8, 2025. When Wikipedia and artificial intelligence disagreed, the AI wasn't more often right than Wikipedia. Sometimes, the AI even correctly criticized a sentence, but also provided false facts itself. That's why human review was so important. At the same time, most AI models are also trained on Wikipedia articles. The AI has therefore very likely overlooked some errors because it learned inaccurate information from Wikipedia (Google translate).
• Krempl, Stefan (July 5, 2025). "Wikipedia criticized for many errors and outdated information". Heise Group. Retrieved July 6, 2025. According to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung (FAS), it has examined 1000 randomly selected entries in the German-language Wikipedia for accuracy. ... At least 20 percent of the entries contained information that was "no longer up to date".
• Dobusch, Leonhard (July 7, 2025). "Wie hunderte entdeckte Fehler in der Wikipedia ihre Glaubwürdigkeit stärken" [How hundreds of discovered errors in Wikipedia strengthen its credibility]. netzpolitik.org (in German). Retrieved July 10, 2025. The fact that errors can be systematically researched and promptly corrected is a cornerstone of Wikipedia's credibility and quality as the most important repository of knowledge of our time. Of course, Wikipedia knowledge is always provisional and never completely secure – like knowledge in general (Google translate).
• Garfield, Simon (July 11, 2025). "An encyclopedia like no other". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved July 11, 2025. Exceptionally for such a popular resource, Wikipedia does not track you or sell any of your search information. It does not carry advertisements or monetize itself beyond regular appeals to users for small donations. It is fully accountable, with every keystroke credited and dated to a specific user. It is continually trying to improve its accuracy, reach, diversity of content and contributors. And beyond all this, it is a thing relentlessly and reliably useful.
• Kotian, Tanishtha (July 11, 2025). "12 Absolutely Bone-Chilling Medieval Castle Tales That Sent Me Into A 3 AM Wikipedia Rabbit Hole". BuzzFeed. Retrieved July 11, 2025. Here are 12 stories that will make you spiral down the Wikipedia rabbit hole:
• Ro, Crystal (July 17, 2025). "21 Disturbing Wikipedia Pages That Are So Traumatizing, I Regret Clicking Them". BuzzFeed. Retrieved July 21, 2025. The Hello Kitty murder case, Junko Furuta, the Toy-Box Killer, and so many more nightmares ahead.
• Greene, David; Schmon, Christoph (July 17, 2025). "We Support Wikimedia Foundation's Challenge to UK's Online Safety Act". Electronic Frontier Foundation. Retrieved July 21, 2025. Wikipedia is the world's most trusted and widely used encyclopedia, with users across the word accessing its wealth of information and participating in free information exchange through the site. The OSA must not be allowed to diminish it and jeopardize the volunteers on which it depends.
• Di Stefano, Mark (July 17, 2025). "Ex-Rio Tinto chief has an anonymous guardian angel". Australian Financial Review. Retrieved July 21, 2025. It does expose the weakness of a website like Wikipedia. It relies on unpaid individuals to oversee an acceptable first version of history and enforce its policies around bias and undue emphasis. Given that, it's remarkable it's as good as it is.
• Field, Matt (July 23, 2025). "Wikipedia threatens to limit UK access to website". The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved July 23, 2025. To stay outside the scope of the regulation, Wikipedia could cap visitor numbers from the UK so it does not qualify as a "category one" site, which are defined as those with seven million users. This would make it harder for British users to access the site when they wanted.
• "AI is eating leftist garbage from Wikipedia — and YOU consume what comes out". New York Post. July 23, 2025. Retrieved July 24, 2025. Here's alarming news: AI bots rely heavily on Wikipedia, which feed them a diet of half-truths, ideological bias and leftist lies — and then pass along the propaganda to millions of unsuspecting readers.
• Edwards, Samantha (July 26, 2025). "Wikipedia editors, the internet's nerdy unsung heroes, keep the website one of the last best places online". The Globe and Mail. Retrieved July 26, 2025. People are increasingly using chatbots to seek out information they would have once found on Wikipedia. (Ironically the website is one of the most widely used data sources for AI training models owing to its open licence.) Some editors and researchers worry fewer people will visit the website directly.
• Mohan-Hickson, Matthew (July 28, 2025). "Online Safety Act: Wikipedia could 'introduce cap' on British visitors - amid OSA high court challenge". The Star. Retrieved July 28, 2025. The nonprofit is particularly concerned about the Categorisation Regulations contained within the bill, and how the website could be in the top tier: category one. It would require Wikipedia to enforce ID verification on its anonymous voluntary moderators, as well as visitors.
• Scheer, Theo (July 28, 2025). "Colleges Aren't Supposed to Fiddle With Their Wikipedia Pages. They Try Anyway". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved July 31, 2025. Wikipedia might seem like a place where colleges can easily shape their reputations. That's certainly what communications and marketing departments would like — and many have taken to the site to correct information or, in some cases, make it more flattering. But their efforts don't go very far.
• Pavia, Will (July 28, 2025). "So, you're a disgraced CEO. What now?". The Times. Retrieved August 5, 2025. These debates now matter, to reputation specialists, due to the rise of AI-powered search engines, says Bennett Kleinberg, founder of Jupiter Strategies. "The robots have to pay to read The Times of London," he says. "But everything on Wikipedia is in the public domain … The content on Wikipedia is driving so much of the content that is ultimately displayed, in AI."

August

• Cohen, Eden (August 4, 2025). "Anti-Israel activists are rewriting Jewish history on Wikipedia — here's why it matters". Unpacked. Retrieved August 4, 2025. They've rewritten the narrative around the expulsion of Palestinians, erased records of suicide bombings to portray Palestinians as more innocent, and revised articles on ancient history to downplay or omit the Jewish people's presence and historical connection to the land.
• Maiberg, Emanuel (August 5, 2025). "Wikipedia Editors Adopt 'Speedy Deletion' Policy for AI Slop Articles". 404 Media. Retrieved August 5, 2025. The solution Wikipedians came up with is to allow the speedy deletion of clearly AI-generated articles that broadly meet two conditions.
• Wu, Daniel (August 8, 2025). "Volunteers fight to keep 'AI slop' off Wikipedia". The Washington Post. Retrieved August 8, 2025. Large language models have made it easier than ever to generate convincing writing for Wikipedia, Miller and Kaffee said. It's an enticing shortcut for novice contributors or those with an agenda.
• Castro, Alex (August 8, 2025). "How Wikipedia is fighting AI slop content". The Verge. Retrieved August 11, 2025. Despite varying viewpoints about AI across the Wikipedia community, the Wikimedia Foundation isn't against using it as long as it results in accurate, high-quality writing.
• Ford, Heather (August 10, 2025). "Wikipedia's 'neutrality' has always been complicated. New rules will make questioning it harder". The Conversation. Retrieved August 11, 2025. Most of Wikipedia's critics aren't pushing for better neutrality. They just don't like what Wikipedia says.
• Clifton, Mizy (August 11, 2025). "Wikipedia loses challenge to UK Online Safety Act". Politico. Retrieved August 11, 2025. Although not in the Wikimedia Foundation's favor, the ruling "does not give Ofcom and the Secretary of State [for Science, Innovation and Technology] a green light to implement a regime that would significantly impede Wikipedia's operations," the court said.
• "Wikipedia operator loses court challenge to UK Online Safety Act regulations". Reuters. August 11, 2025. Retrieved August 11, 2025. The Wikimedia Foundation took legal action at London's High Court over regulations made under the law, which it said could impose the most stringent category of duties on Wikipedia.
• "Wikipedia could reduce UK users as it loses legal challenge against online safety legislation". Australian Broadcasting Corporation. August 11, 2025. Retrieved August 11, 2025. Judge Jeremy Johnson dismissed its case but said the Wikimedia Foundation could bring a further challenge if regulator Ofcom "(impermissibly) concludes that Wikipedia is a Category 1 service".
• Mboyah, Duncan (August 11, 2025). "African Researchers, Gender Experts Urged to Contribute to Wikipedia". ScienceAfrica. Retrieved August 11, 2025. Caroline Mwaura, chairperson of Kenyan Wikimedia hub said that they have reached out to Pwani University as part of a move to generate content and it has plans to reach out to contributors from other universities.
• Mboyah, Duncan (August 11, 2025). "Cameroonian Engineer Awarded Wikipedia's Technology Contributor of the Year". ScienceAfrica. Retrieved August 13, 2025. The Wikimedian of the Year award winners are recognized across several categories, from new contributors to long-time volunteers, highlighting the diverse and vibrant community that makes the Wikimedia projects possible.
• Hall, Rachel (August 11, 2025). "Wikipedia can challenge Online Safety Act if strictest rules apply to it, says judge". The Guardian. Retrieved August 11, 2025. The operator of Wikipedia has been given permission by a high court judge to challenge the Online Safety Act if it is categorised as a high-risk platform, which would impose the most stringent duties.
• Vallance, Chris (August 11, 2025). "Wikipedia loses challenge against Online Safety Act verification rules". BBC. Wikipedia has been caught in the stricter regulations due to its size and user created content even though it argues (convincingly) that it differs significantly from other user-to-user platforms, said Mona Schroedel, data protection litigation specialist at law firm Freeths.
• Jones, Connor (August 11, 2025). "Wikipedia host loses challenge to Online Safety Act regs". The Register. If the regulator decides that Wikipedia falls under Category 1, the website would have to implement the same identity-verification tech as social media and pornography sites since July 25. In the organization's view, the consequences of it having to do so would be extensive and damaging for its users' privacy.
• Mak, Aaron (August 12, 2025). "Wikipedia loses a round to the UK". Politico. Retrieved August 13, 2025. To Wikipedia's lawyers, the law itself is almost a case of mistaken identity. Wikipedia, they argue, isn't the kind of social-media platform that the law was intended to regulate.
• Nudo, Meredith (August 12, 2025). "The Unexpected Ways in Which Houstonians Have Helped Shape Wikipedia". The Houstonian. Retrieved August 13, 2025. Strassmann, who has since worked with the Wikimedia Foundation and served on the board of Wiki Education, first got the idea for incorporating Wikipedia into her lessons after observing her son's reliance on the site.
• Milton, Josh (August 12, 2025). "Wikipedia loses Online Safety Act challenge – what does it mean for the internet?". Metro. Retrieved August 13, 2025. The court ultimately dismissed Wikimedia's judicial review, but Justice Johnson said Wikimedia has two grounds to lodge another.
• "UK Court Refuses to Exempt Wikipedia from Online Safety Act, Treats it on Par With Social Media". MediaNama. August 14, 2025. Retrieved August 14, 2025.
• Harkness, Timandra (August 13, 2025). "The Online Safety Act threatens Wikipedia's future". UnHerd. Retrieved August 14, 2025. The Online Safety Act is already being accused of censorship, as scenes of protests and speeches in Parliament are hidden from users who haven't proved they are over 18. But, as the Wikipedia case shows, the potential for hiding content from adults goes much further.
• Krantz, Signe (August 14, 2025). "Bara britterna tror att Wikipedia är en porrsajt" [Only the British think Wikipedia is a porn site]. Aftonbladet (in Swedish). Retrieved August 14, 2025. Wikipedia, the world's leading public education site, could suffer the same fate as Reddit . They don't want to track users or know who you are. They challenged the law to be exempted from the rules, but lost in court. If they are caught by the law's harshest rules, they could be fined, forced to restrict the site, or blocked from the UK altogether.
• Lawi, Jacktone (August 14, 2025). "African tech leaders chart Wikipedia's AI future in Nairobi". The Star. Retrieved August 15, 2025. Speaking during a keynote panel at the first-ever Wikimania hosted in East Africa, Ugandan computer scientist Joyce Nakatumba-Nabende and South African data scientist Professor Vukosi Marivate warned that while generative AI holds vast potential to expand and improve access to knowledge, it also poses serious risks if unchecked.
• Anderson, Nate (August 15, 2025). "Dedicated volunteer exposes "single largest self-promotion operation in Wikipedia's history"". Ars Technica. Retrieved August 15, 2025. Could the whole thing be some kind of "art project," with the real payoff being exposure and being written about? Perhaps. But whatever the motive behind the decade-long effort to boost Woodard on Wikipedia, the incident reminds us just how much effort some people are willing to put into polluting open or public-facing projects for their own ends.
• Husain, Nyla (August 19, 2025). "Wiki Scientist helps physicists build street cred on Wikipedia". American Physical Society. Retrieved August 22, 2025. For members of the physics community, that's where the American Physical Society's Wiki Scientist courses come in. The six-week program, offered by the Society's Office of Public Engagement in partnership with Wiki Education, teaches physicists how to add and edit content to Wikipedia pages for a variety of physics-related topics, from its history and people to its concepts and theories.
• Maiberg, Emanuel (August 19, 2025). "Jimmy Wales Says Wikipedia Could Use AI. Editors Call It the 'Antithesis of Wikipedia'". 404 Media. Retrieved August 22, 2025. Wales and editors proceeded to get into it in the replies to his article. The basic disagreement is that Wales thinks that LLMs can be useful to Wikipedia, even if they are sometimes wrong, while editors think an automated system that is sometimes wrong is fundamentally at odds with the human labor and cooperation that makes Wikipedia so valuable to begin with.
• Ralha, Leonardo (August 20, 2025). "César do Paço vai processar editores mesmo após Wikipédia apagar 'informações falsas'" [Caesar DePaço will sue editors even after Wikipedia deletes 'false information']. Diário de Notícias (in Portuguese). Retrieved September 1, 2025. Um dos responsáveis da Fundação Wikimedia, Joe Sutherland, defendeu, num texto dirigido à comunidade de editores, que a decisão da Justiça portuguesa "prejudica o direito à privacidade e à liberdade de expressão dos voluntários que contribuem com edições." [One of the people responsible for the Wikimedia Foundation, Joe Sutherland, argued, in a text addressed to the community of editors, that the decision of the Portuguese court "harms the right to privacy and freedom of expression of volunteers who contribute edits."]
• Inserra, David (August 22, 2025). "New Court Decision Out of Portugal Shows How Essential Section 230 Is to a Free Internet". Cato Institute. Retrieved August 31, 2025. If everyone who doesn't like a Wikipedia entry is allowed to sue Wikipedia as European laws allow, then every piece of content is a potential legal and financial risk.
• Sperling, Jonathan (August 25, 2025). "ChatGPT Is Stealing Readers From Wikipedia". Columbia Business School. Retrieved August 26, 2025. While overall Wikipedia traffic remains steady, the researchers find that specific types of articles—those whose content closely resembles what ChatGPT would generate—have seen a noticeable drop in readership since ChatGPT's launch.
• Schmad, Robert (August 27, 2025). "Congress opens investigation into Wikipedia over foreign efforts to 'manipulate' information". Washington Examiner. Retrieved August 27, 2025. In addition to being influenced from the outside, the Wikimedia Foundation also doles out hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to activist groups seeking to bring the online encyclopedia more in line with traditionally left-of-center points of view. For instance, its 2022-2023 tax documents indicate that the philanthropy made grants to organizations such as Art+Feminism, Whose Knowledge, and Black Lunch Table, all of which conduct coordinated editing operations.
• Smith, Thomas (August 27, 2025). "Want to disguise your AI writing? Start with Wikipedia's new list". Fast Company. Retrieved August 27, 2025. Wikipedia famously crowdsources its information through a network of volunteer contributors and editors. This combination of crowdsourced data and highly specific niche topics is a recipe for the misuse of AI.
• Brooks, Emily (August 27, 2025). "Republicans investigate Wikipedia over allegations of organized bias". The Hill. Retrieved August 27, 2025. Wikipedia has long faced accusations of its entries having a political bias, with the right-leaning Manhattan Institute releasing a report in 2024 that found Wikipedia entries are more likely to attach a negative sentiment to right-leaning terms.
• "Comer and Mace Investigate Efforts to Manipulate Information on Wikipedia". United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. August 27, 2025. Retrieved August 27, 2025. The House Oversight Committee is investigating manipulation efforts to determine the role and methods of foreign individuals, those at academic institutions subsidized by United States taxpayer dollars, as well as Wikipedia's awareness and response.
• Kumar Das, Prabhanu (August 28, 2025). "US Congress Investigates Wikipedia Over Alleged Foreign Manipulation, Bias". MediaNama. Retrieved August 28, 2025. In recent years, right-wing figures in the United States have raised concerns about perceived political bias in Wikipedia's content and other large online platforms.
• Carr, Mary Kate (August 28, 2025). "Republican quest to meddle with all informational institutions arrives at Wikipedia". The A.V. Club. Retrieved August 28, 2025. Exerting control over media and information is one of the hallmarks of a fascist movement. Apropos of nothing, two prominent Republicans from the House Committee on Oversight and Government reform, Kentucky representative James Comer and South Carolina's Nancy Mace, have launched an inquiry into Wikipedia.
• Ropek, Lucas (August 28, 2025). "MAGA Puts Wikipedia in Its Crosshairs". Gizmodo. Retrieved August 28, 2025. When it comes to open-source and decentralized information resources like Wikipedia, however, it appears the plan may be to find evidence of a nefarious conspiracy that justifies reworking the platform to your liking.
• Prager, Stephen (August 28, 2025). "GOP Investigation Pressures Wikipedia to Reveal Identities of Editors Accused of 'Bias' Against Israel". Common Dreams. Retrieved August 28, 2025. It was, in essence, a request by Congress for Wikipedia to "dox" many of its editors.
• Forlini, Emily (August 28, 2025). "House Republicans Demand Details on Wikipedia Contributors Who 'Inject Bias'". PCMag. Retrieved August 29, 2025. Two House Republicans are on the hunt for problematic Wikipedia contributors.
• Heller, Mathilda (August 28, 2025). "Wikimedia under investigation by US Congress regarding foreign involvement in articles about Israel". The Jerusalem Post. Retrieved August 29, 2025. Interestingly, the letter specifically highlights systematic efforts to advance antisemitic and anti-Israel information in Wikipedia articles related to Israel.
• "Martyr eller terrorist – så beskrivs Gaza-kriget på Wikipedia på olika språk" [Martyr or terrorist - this is how the Gaza war is described on Wikipedia in different languages]. Sveriges Television (in Swedish). August 30, 2025. Retrieved August 30, 2025. SVT has compared a number of Wikipedia pages on Israel/Palestine-related topics, in English, Arabic and Hebrew. How do they differ?

September

• Dzieza, Josh (September 4, 2025). "Wikipedia is resilient because it is boring". The Verge. Retrieved September 4, 2025. Wikipedia has come to play a similar role of factual ballast to an increasingly unmoored internet, but without the same institutional authority and with its own methods developed piecemeal over the last two decades for arriving at consensus fact. How to defend it from political attacks is not straightforward.

• "Wikipedia editors publish new guide to help readers detect entries written by AI". Morning Edition. September 4, 2025. NPR. Retrieved September 5, 2025. While poring over new submissions for anything AI generated, they found errors, fake sources and people in places that were made up. But as AI advanced, the signs became more subtle, which is why Lebleu and other editors now look for less obvious tells, such as cliches.
• Berrien, Hank (September 4, 2025). "The Anti-Zionism Sentence Wikipedia Won't Let You Touch". The Daily Wire. Retrieved September 5, 2025. On August 27, 2025, the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform launched an investigation into the Wikimedia Foundation to examine potential foreign manipulation of Wikipedia, especially content related to Israel and antisemitism.
• Bozell, Brent; Graham, Tim (September 5, 2025). "Google Gives You Wikipedia Tilt on Cable News Channels". Townhall. Retrieved September 5, 2025. If they were to write about cable news, the Wikipedia results are as biased as ... well, cable news. Their entries on Fox News Channel and Newsmax are remarkably different from the ones on CNN and MSNBC.
• Smith, Molly G (September 4, 2025). "Scandals Erased, Editors Paid: How Big Law Firms Try to Control Their Wikipedia Pages". Law.com. Retrieved September 5, 2025. After analyzing thousands of edits to law firm pages and speaking to multiple sources, Law.com International can reveal how some law firms have used paid editors, often covertly, or been blocked for conflicts of interest, and how details on sex scandals have quietly disappeared, political language has been softened, and hyperbole added, removed, and then reintroduced.
• Rindsberg, Ashley (September 11, 2025). "Leftist Wikipedia Editors Twist Facts in Shameless Move to Smear Charlie Kirk". Fox News. Archived from the original on September 17, 2025. Retrieved September 18, 2025. At its core, Wikipedia is a wrapper for the mainstream media. Its infamous "Reliable Sources" list of news outlets that can be used as references and sources Wikipedia editors consider to be "reliable" as green and those they deem "unreliable" as red. The green sites read like a semi-official list of the mainstream media: New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, NBC News, CBS News, ABC News, Associated Press. It disproportionately marks conservative outlets as unreliable, while giving a neutral rating to the Chinese propaganda outlet China Daily.
• Harrison, Stephen (September 17, 2025). "Why Right-Wing Outlets Attacked Wikipedia After Charlie Kirk's Shooting". Slate. Retrieved September 18, 2025. What should be clear by now is that right-wing media coverage of Wikipedia isn't actually interested in explaining how the site works. The goal is to undermine Wikipedia's function as a volunteer-driven project that can produce an independent repository of facts that has (at least historically) been insulated from political interference.

See also

• WP:Wikipedia in blogs
• WP:Wikipedia on TV and radio
• WP:Press coverage of health information