Changes

This article lists examples of [[Bias in Wikipedia]], related to [[Liberal]] politicians and the protection of them:

This article lists examples of [[Bias in Wikipedia]], related to [[Liberal]] politicians and the protection of them:

#The Wikipedia article on the liberal former President of [[Brazil]], [[Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Luiz_In%C3%A1cio_Lula_da_Silva&oldid=526671990|title=Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva|accessdate=December 12, 2012}}</ref> makes a passing reference to the [[mensalão scandal]] as if Lula was not personally involved, but fails to report that convicted conspirators testified that Lula himself knew of and approved of the vote buying.<ref>{{cite news|title=Brazil: Report: Lula knew of vote-buying scheme|work=Washington Post|date=December 12, 2012|page=A8}}</ref> Instead, Wikipedia depicts Lula as a widely admired politician.

#The Wikipedia article on the liberal former President of [[Brazil]], [[Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva]]<ref>{{cite web|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Luiz_In%C3%A1cio_Lula_da_Silva&oldid=526671990|title=Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva|accessdate=December 12, 2012}}</ref> makes a passing reference to the [[mensalão scandal]] as if Lula was not personally involved, but fails to report that convicted conspirators testified that Lula himself knew of and approved of the vote buying.<ref>{{cite news|title=Brazil: Report: Lula knew of vote-buying scheme|work=Washington Post|date=December 12, 2012|page=A8}}</ref> Instead, Wikipedia depicts Lula as a widely admired politician.

#Noting that Al Gore's 2009 statement that he won a 2007 British court case about [[An Inconvenient Truth]] ran contrary to the actual ruling and, especially, the judge's statement that the claimant won the case against the film is considered "original research" and "POV" on Wikipedia.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dimmock_v_Secretary_of_State_for_Education_and_Skills&diff=302098981&oldid=302092626</ref>

#Noting that Al Gore's 2009 statement that he won a 2007 British court case about [[An Inconvenient Truth]] ran contrary to the actual ruling and, especially, the judge's statement that the claimant won the case against the film is considered "original research" and "POV" on Wikipedia.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dimmock_v_Secretary_of_State_for_Education_and_Skills&diff=302098981&oldid=302092626</ref>

#  Wikpedia's entry on [[liberal]] former Vice President [[Al Gore]] contains no mention of the drug charges against his son.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gore</ref> But Wikipedia's entry on [[conservative]] Vice President [[Dick Cheney]] prominently mentions his adult daughter's sexuality.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Cheney</ref> However, due to Wikipedia's liberal editor base, this could be a case of only excluding what the editors believe is negative press about the politicians' respective children, which would be consistent with site policy. In such a case, this example would be better suited for the [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Homosexuality|homosexuality]] category.

#  Wikpedia's entry on [[liberal]] former Vice President [[Al Gore]] contains no mention of the drug charges against his son.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gore</ref> But Wikipedia's entry on [[conservative]] Vice President [[Dick Cheney]] prominently mentions his adult daughter's sexuality.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Cheney</ref> However, due to Wikipedia's liberal editor base, this could be a case of only excluding what the editors believe is negative press about the politicians' respective children, which would be consistent with site policy. In such a case, this example would be better suited for the [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Homosexuality|homosexuality]] category.

# When [[Al Gore]]'s sex scandal was reported, no mention of this issue was allowed on the Al Gore page. The Al Gore Talk page consisted of many liberals saying that it wasn't actually a story. Attempts to create the subject matter elsewhere on Wikipedia were all removed.

# When [[Al Gore]]'s sex scandal was reported, no mention of this issue was allowed on the Al Gore page. The Al Gore Talk page consisted of many liberals saying that it wasn't actually a story. Attempts to create the subject matter elsewhere on Wikipedia were all removed.

#Wikipedia's article on Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign makes no mention of her endorsement by the leadership of the terrorist group Hamas,<ref>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58699</ref> but lists endorsements of Republican presidential candidates by the Ku Klux Klan.

#Wikipedia's article on Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign makes no mention of her endorsement by the leadership of the terrorist group Hamas,<ref>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58699</ref> but lists endorsements of Republican presidential candidates by the Ku Klux Klan.

# Wikipedia now promotes the late [[liberal]] icon [[Ted Kennedy]] as the leader of ... "progressivism": "By the time of his death, he had come to be viewed as a major figure and spokesman for American progressivism."<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kennedy</ref>  Where on earth did that [[liberal denial]] come from?

# Wikipedia now promotes the late [[liberal]] icon [[Ted Kennedy]] as the leader of ... "progressivism": "By the time of his death, he had come to be viewed as a major figure and spokesman for American progressivism."<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kennedy</ref>  Where on earth did that [[liberal denial]] come from?

# Wikipedia's article of [[Jimmy Carter]]'s Presidency is clearly biased in favor of the failed politician.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Jimmy_Carter#Budget</ref>

# Wikipedia's article of [[Jimmy Carter]]'s Presidency is clearly biased in favor of the failed politician.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Jimmy_Carter#Budget</ref>

# Progressivism: List of notable current/former progressives in US Congress:<ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism#United_States]</ref>  Year-long edit war trying to keep well-known and self-admitted progressives Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Maxine Waters on this list. An editor with a history of left-wing neutral-point-of-view complaints is using every excuse to keep these three names off of the list. This liberal gatekeeper was first complaining about a lack of citations, but after citations were provided of Obama and Clinton in their own words describing *themselves* as progressives, the liberal editor is now trying to argue that "just because they say they are progressives doesn't mean they are", or that "They aren't current members of the Progressive caucus, thus they can't be progressives".  This edit war has gone on for over a year, and is now working its way through moderation - likely via liberal moderators. See Wikipedia Progressivism [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Progressivism#United_States_section_-_list_of_Progressives_in_Congress Talk Page] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Progressivism:_2.6_United_States:_List_of_progressive_Congress_members_discussion Dispute Resolution Discussion]

# Progressivism: List of notable current/former progressives in US Congress:<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism#United_States]</ref>  Year-long edit war trying to keep well-known and self-admitted progressives Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Maxine Waters on this list. An editor with a history of left-wing neutral-point-of-view complaints is using every excuse to keep these three names off of the list. This liberal gatekeeper was first complaining about a lack of citations, but after citations were provided of Obama and Clinton in their own words describing *themselves* as progressives, the liberal editor is now trying to argue that "just because they say they are progressives doesn't mean they are", or that "They aren't current members of the Progressive caucus, thus they can't be progressives".  This edit war has gone on for over a year, and is now working its way through moderation - likely via liberal moderators. See Wikipedia Progressivism [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Progressivism#United_States_section_-_list_of_Progressives_in_Congress Talk Page] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Progressivism:_2.6_United_States:_List_of_progressive_Congress_members_discussion Dispute Resolution Discussion]

# Wikipedia editors tried strenuously to come up with reasons to censor embarrassing stories about the liberal John Edwards,<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:John_Edwards</ref> despite frequently including smears against [[conservatives]].<ref>For example, Wikipedia ''does'' mention the liberal New York Times' poorly-researched allegations that John McCain had an affair [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain_presidential_campaign%2C_2008#Alleged_inappropriate_involvement_with_lobbyists] in spite of the fact that the NYT's own ombudsman said there was "no proof" the story was true.[http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hiZBfIDZs3P-I5ERtItxUcQ8JwGw]</ref> Several sites have stories about Wikipedia's obvious liberal bias on this issue.<ref>http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/07/28/wikipedia-disallows-any-mention-alleged-john-edwards-scandal</ref><ref>http://gawker.com/5029921/john-edwards-wikipedia-page-strangely-love-child+free</ref><ref>http://conservativepulse.com/home/2008/07/edwards-sex-scandal-still-hasnt-surfaced-in-the-mainstream-press/</ref>  

# Wikipedia editors tried strenuously to come up with reasons to censor embarrassing stories about the liberal John Edwards,<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:John_Edwards</ref> despite frequently including smears against [[conservatives]].<ref>For example, Wikipedia ''does'' mention the liberal New York Times' poorly-researched allegations that John McCain had an affair [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain_presidential_campaign%2C_2008#Alleged_inappropriate_involvement_with_lobbyists] in spite of the fact that the NYT's own ombudsman said there was "no proof" the story was true.[http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hiZBfIDZs3P-I5ERtItxUcQ8JwGw]</ref> Several sites have stories about Wikipedia's obvious liberal bias on this issue.<ref>http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/07/28/wikipedia-disallows-any-mention-alleged-john-edwards-scandal</ref><ref>http://gawker.com/5029921/john-edwards-wikipedia-page-strangely-love-child+free</ref><ref>http://conservativepulse.com/home/2008/07/edwards-sex-scandal-still-hasnt-surfaced-in-the-mainstream-press/</ref>  

# [[Wikipedia]] described the [[People for the American Way]], which is a liberal advocacy group,<ref>http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200507060931.asp</ref> as a "progressive advocacy organization"<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_For_the_American_Way</ref> and did not mention the term liberal in its lengthy description of it until well after this deficiency was first mentioned here.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=People_For_the_American_Way&diff=198768678&oldid=195716955</ref>

# [[Wikipedia]] described the [[People for the American Way]], which is a liberal advocacy group,<ref>http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200507060931.asp</ref> as a "progressive advocacy organization"<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_For_the_American_Way</ref> and did not mention the term liberal in its lengthy description of it until well after this deficiency was first mentioned here.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=People_For_the_American_Way&diff=198768678&oldid=195716955</ref>

# On August 26, 2016, the UK Chapter of Wikimedia is conducting an edit session at the  National Liberal Club "to get better, more in-depth coverage of liberal issues and liberal history in the online encyclopaedia, updating and expanding articles."  No similar edit session has been scheduled for conservative issues or conservative history.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.libdemvoice.org/wikipedia-editathon-on-liberal-history-51459.html|title=Wikipedia “edit-a-thon” on Liberal History|accessdate=August 10, 2016}}</ref>

# On August 26, 2016, the UK Chapter of Wikimedia is conducting an edit session at the  National Liberal Club "to get better, more in-depth coverage of liberal issues and liberal history in the online encyclopaedia, updating and expanding articles."  No similar edit session has been scheduled for conservative issues or conservative history.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.libdemvoice.org/wikipedia-editathon-on-liberal-history-51459.html|title=Wikipedia “edit-a-thon” on Liberal History|accessdate=August 10, 2016}}</ref>

# Various attempts have been made on Wikipedia to emphasize the controversial fact that [[Elizabeth Warren]]<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Warren&oldid=755585604</ref> claimed on many occasions to be a Native American and a "person of color" despite a lack of documented evidence. Due to the revival of this controversy by Donald Trump in the 2016 election, attempts were made to create a separate paragraph about the issue. However, a cabal of administrators instead insisted that the controversy remain buried in the bottom of a section about her 2012 campaign where many readers said they were unable to find it.<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Elizabeth_Warren&oldid=755040824 This, for example ("Controversies"), where an editor did not know it was already in the article.]</ref>

# Various attempts have been made on Wikipedia to emphasize the controversial fact that [[Elizabeth Warren]]<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Elizabeth_Warren&oldid=755585604</ref> claimed on many occasions to be a Native American and a "person of color" despite a lack of documented evidence. Due to the revival of this controversy by Donald Trump in the 2016 election, attempts were made to create a separate paragraph about the issue. However, a cabal of administrators instead insisted that the controversy remain buried in the bottom of a section about her 2012 campaign where many readers said they were unable to find it.<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Elizabeth_Warren&oldid=755040824 This, for example ("Controversies"), where an editor did not know it was already in the article.]</ref>

#Wikipedia editors have downplayed Antifa's violence and far-left-wing ideology and portrayed it favorably.<ref>Adler, T.D. (August 31, 2017). [http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/08/31/editors-on-wikipedia-seek-to-downplay-violence-and-ideology-of-antifa-movement/ Wikipedia Editors Seek to Downplay Antifa Violence And Far-Left Ideology]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved August 31, 2017.</ref>

#Wikipedia editors have downplayed Antifa's violence and far-left-wing ideology and portrayed it favorably.<ref>Adler, T.D. (August 31, 2017). [https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/08/31/editors-on-wikipedia-seek-to-downplay-violence-and-ideology-of-antifa-movement/ Wikipedia Editors Seek to Downplay Antifa Violence And Far-Left Ideology]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved August 31, 2017.</ref>

#In the intro of [[Peter Navarro]]'s Wikipedia article, editors removed well-sourced information showing that the [[Trump Administration]] trade advisor (who held conservative views on trade and nationalism) took left-wing positions on environmental issues and was a Democrat.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_Navarro&diff=832814897&oldid=832814611</ref><ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_Navarro&diff=832820037&oldid=832819450</ref> One very left-wing editor used the edit summary "''a liberal and an environmentalist... riiiiggghhhhhttttt''" while misrepresenting two sources.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_Navarro&diff=832817095&oldid=832816083</ref>

#In the intro of [[Peter Navarro]]'s Wikipedia article, editors removed well-sourced information showing that the [[Trump Administration]] trade advisor (who held conservative views on trade and nationalism) took left-wing positions on environmental issues and was a Democrat.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_Navarro&diff=832814897&oldid=832814611</ref><ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_Navarro&diff=832820037&oldid=832819450</ref> One very left-wing editor used the edit summary "''a liberal and an environmentalist... riiiiggghhhhhttttt''" while misrepresenting two sources.<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peter_Navarro&diff=832817095&oldid=832816083</ref>