Larry Sanger

Or other personally identifying information.

And so basically there is no way of knowing who is ultimately in control or how it all works out.

It would be fascinating if somehow somebody took a God's eye view and, you know, had doxed everybody.

Yeah.

Or at least had a database of all the information and said, okay, who is working for who, in what countries, but nobody knows, right?

I think it's got to be some fairly wealthy and powerful people with regard to certain articles, because there are some people who are working like full time, right?

as necessary to shore up their own influence over particular articles.

I think so.

Right.

But I would say this, as a whole, Wikipedia has what I call a framework now.

You could call it a bias, I suppose, although I think a framework is slightly different from a bias.

I won't get into that anyway, but the framework I call GASP.

So globalist, academic, secular, and progressive, right?

So globalist in the sense of like multinational institutions trying to impose their will on the globe, right?

Academic, meaning whatever is the leading view among academics is presented as fact.

Minority views, if they're permitted at all, which sometimes they aren't, are labeled as such or disdained.

Let's see.

Secular means essentially that...

In articles about religious topics, especially anything that is a point of controversy that essentially historical, critical Bible scholars, for example, and other secular scholars in philosophy or in religion discuss,

They tend to assume methodological naturalism, which means basically you can't assume or assert that anything supernatural has happened at all, which is as prejudicial as it sounds.