zlacker

This.

I stopped donating when I saw how politicised they were.

People are people, and will have opinions about things. People of a kind will naturally group together. This is all fine, but it becomes a problem when one of the things that make what you produce worthwhile is neutrality, and you can't keep your politics in your pants.

>>ghusto+(OP)
I don't really believe these claims of "Wokepedia", because no-one making these claims has presented actual evidence.

I'm sure you have some though, otherwise commenting as you did would mean you'd be as guilty of "not keeping your politics in your pants" as you accuse Wikipedia of being.

>>Edward+i3
> I don't really believe these claims of "Wokepedia"

I expect this would qualify.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_Equity_Fund

which also links to:

https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2020/06/03/we-stand-for...

Most people would probably place a lot of this firmly in the "woke" category.

>>naaski+Vt
> The Wikimedia Foundation defines racial equity as shifting away from Eurocentricity, White-male-imperialist-patriarchal supremacy, superiority, power and privilege

Well then. That makes it perfectly clear that Wikimedia is under the sway of partisan activists.