Wikipedia and the "COVID-19 pandemic"

Today it is difficult to find a literate person who would not resort to the help of Wikipedia. This is the name of a public multilingual universal Internet encyclopaedia (located at wikipedia.org). In terms of the volume of information and thematic coverage, Wikipedia is considered the most complete encyclopaedia ever created in the entire history of mankind. It contains more than 40 million articles. The Wikipedia website is the 13th most visited website in the world.

One of the main advantages of Wikipedia as a universal encyclopaedia is the ability to present information in the user's native language (Wikipedia has sections in more than 300 languages). The Wikipedia section in Russian, as of August 17, 2021, has 1,746,585 articles on various topics, ranking 7th in terms of the number of articles among all language sections. The most voluminous and visited, of course, is the English-language section.

Another important advantage, which was conceived at the start of the project, is that any Internet user can create and edit articles in Wikipedia. Users are promised that all their suggestions (corrections and additions) will become available to all Wikipedia users after being checked by editors. It is conceived as a project of collective creativity.

The owner of the Wikipedia website is an American non-profit organisation, the Wikimedia Foundation, which has 37 regional offices.

Already at the end of the noughties, some Wikipedia users had doubts that this global electronic encyclopaedia is a source of truly objective information. There were suspicions that someone is imperceptibly interfering in the creative process of many thousands (and, according to some estimates, even millions) of independent authors and editors. Critical statements about Wikipedia began to appear on the Internet and social networks.

It turns out that Wikipedia is actually managed by less than half a thousand active administrators. As of August 16, 2021, there were only 470 of them, and the real identity of many of them remains unknown. Moreover, studies have shown that 80% of all Wikipedia content is written by only 1% of all Wikipedia editors, which again amounts to only a few hundred mostly unknown people.

The publication "The Atlantic" directly called Wikipedia an opaque and hierarchical structure that is subject to corruption and manipulation. A vivid manifestation of this was the "paid editors" hired by corporations. Joe Pinsker writes about this in his article "The Covert World of People Trying to Edit Wikipedia – For Pay".

For example, the administrator of the German Wikipedia was exposed as a project manager at the pharmaceutical company Merck, who "bleached" Wikipedia articles about the history and products of Merck.

Of course, companies not only Big Pharma, but also other sectors of the economy have been engaged in distributing money to paid editors and continue to do so. Above, I mentioned the Wikimedia organisation, which owns Wikipedia. This is not just a non-profit structure operating in an American jurisdiction, it is a monetary fund. It has collected about $160 million to date. These are donations not from millions of Wikipedia users, but mainly from large US corporations and influential foundations.

It is worth recalling that the current CEO of Wikimedia, Katherine Roberts Maher, previously worked at the US Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), as well as in the subgroup of the US National Endowment for Democracy (NED). And the chairman of the Wikimedia Foundation is one of the founders of Wikipedia, Jimmy Donal Wales, a friend of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and in the 2000s the "young leader" of the forum in Davos.

Jimmy Wales still maintains close relations with the World Economic Forum (WEF) and its President, Klaus Schwab. Last but not least, Wales needs the WEF platform in order to collect donations from rich participants of the Davos forums.

Wikipedia's behind-the-scenes editorial activity has sharply intensified since the beginning of last year, when the so-called “COVID-19 pandemic” started in the world. The direction of this "editorial" activity is clearly expressed: on the one hand, to support in every possible way the initiators of the plan of the "Great Reset" and the plan itself (it was announced at the beginning of last summer by Klaus Schwab); on the other hand, to "stifle" in every possible way any statements that question this plan or even expose the true goals of the "Great Reset".

More specifically, at this stage of history, "editing "is aimed at inflating the scale of the "pandemic" in every possible way and promoting the cause of universal vaccination of the world's population. Accordingly, critics of the ideology of the "Great Pandemic", which is currently voiced in the most generalised form by the World Health Organisation (WHO), are presented in Wikipedia articles as "inadequate people", "far from science", "spreading fakes", "supporters of the conspiracy theory", etc.

Yesterday, they were presented in Wikipedia as authoritative experts in their fields (first of all, of course, we are talking about medicine and medical science), and today, it turns out, they are already "not friends"with science. The personal pages of individual critics of the "Great Pandemic" are generally deleted.

One can't call it editing. This is already censorship. There are a lot of publications exposing the essence of Wikipedia that was clearly manifested during the "Great Pandemic". But they are blocked in every possible way. And at the same time, they are also ridiculed. This is not even censorship, but something resembling the Inquisition.

As an example of criticism of the shameless "editing" of Wikipedia, carried out in favour of WHO and Big Pharma, I will cite the article Why Does Wikipedia Claim a Fifth of Covid Infections Are 'Severe'?. Its author is Will Jones. Published on the website of "The Daily Sceptic" on April 1, 2021.

The author analyses the key Wikipedia page that is dedicated to COVID-19. And he "stumbles" on the second paragraph: "On its main COVID-19 page – a page which cannot be edited by mere mortals as it is “protected to prevent vandalism” – it states the following in the second paragraph:

‘Of those people who develop noticeable symptoms, most (81%) develop mild to moderate symptoms (up to mild pneumonia), while 14% develop severe symptoms (dyspnea, hypoxia, or more than 50% lung involvement on imaging), and 5% suffer critical symptoms (respiratory failure, shock, or multiorgan dysfunction).’

This is claiming that almost a fifth of symptomatic COVID-19 infections are severe, and 1 in 20 are critical. If these are the statistics that people are reading then no wonder they’re scared."

Where did Wikipedia get the statistics from? It turns out that the link is made to the US Centres for Disease Control (CDC). In its latest clinical guide, in the section entitled "Severity of the disease", the US Federal Health Agency has similar figures, which, in turn, are borrowed from a Chinese study dated back to February 24, 2020.

But the fact is that these Chinese statistics relate to the contingent of patients who were hospitalised, i.e., by definition, they were in a serious condition. And now lies, or misinformation, designed to intimidate a layman, becomes the property of millions and millions of people on the planet.

"Why is the CDC still using this early study as its main source of statistics on the severity of COVID-19 when we’ve found out so much more about the illness since February 2020? Why is Wikipedia featuring these figures at the top of its COVID-19 page? Don’t they realise how misleading and unnecessarily frightening they are?” asks the author of the article rhetorically.

By the way, he cites data from other studies where there is no such "chemistry of disinformation”. The author of the article reports that John P. A. Ioannidis, professor of medicine and epidemiology at Stanford University, has just published a new review of the global COVID-19 infection fatality rate - IFR.

No, it is not 2.3% - the figure that was announced last year by the WHO and which migrated to the analysed Wikipedia page. Professor Ioannidis estimates the global average IFR at about 0.15%.

I will not further retell the article, in which the author identifies various "inconsistencies". But they, alas, remain on the Wikipedia page. After all, as the author ironically noted, it is "a page which cannot be edited by mere mortals as it is ‘protected to prevent vandalism’".

Will Jones expresses confidence that the fight against the so-called "disinformation" launched by the US authorities and Wikipedia will be lost by them. Since the "editing" is very flagrant, the lie is visible to the naked eye.

This month, many people noticed a speech in the press made by one of the founders of Wikipedia, Larry Sanger, with an article “The Astonishing Hubris Of A Global Experimental Vaccine”.

Unlike the above-mentioned Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, Larry Sanger left the project already in 2002 for the reason that he felt that Wikipedia was being taken over by corporations and intelligence agencies. He noticed that soon after the launch, Wikipedia began to lose its objectivity and turn into a tool of those who have monetary and political power in their hands.

At the end of 2004, Sanger stated that "there was a poisonous social and political atmosphere in the project", which he could not put up with. He also stated that although he "highly appreciates the advantages of Wikipedia" and knows and supports the "mission and policy of tolerance of Wikipedia" well, the project still has serious problems. For a long time, he tried to get Wikipedia back on the right track. When he realised that this was impossible, he began to expose its lies and bias.

And here is a strong and bold statement made by Larry Sanger about the current "Great Pandemic". More specifically, about vaccination. Larry Sanger is not an ordinary figure, so his statement received a good resonance. Larry Sanger immediately warns that he is not an opponent of vaccinations at all. He is against the vaccination against COVID-19 that is currently being carried out all over the world.

His doubts about such a vaccination are based on three important features of the ongoing campaign. First, the experimental nature of the drugs. Second, the global reach. Third, the simultaneity of vaccination.

Here is his reasoning: "An objective, indisputable fact: never before in world history has there been a global desire to simultaneously introduce an experimental drug to all mankind, to billions of people."

"Coronavirus vaccines are experimental. They are not approved by the FDA. Most vaccines take many years to be tested and approved, not least because we want to make sure that they do not have dangerous long-term side effects.

Such side effects are possible: The US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has published a list of problems with selected approved vaccines. Many experimental vaccines never go beyond the experimental phase."

"...what if we find a terrifyingly high frequency of catastrophic side effects that manifest only after 2, 5 or 10 years? Scientists say that this is possible. Unfortunately, more people may die from these experimental vaccines than would die from a virus that kills less than 1% of those who are infected with it."

"But my current argument is simple: experimental vaccines - billions of people - at the same time. It is inconceivable to the mind how many otherwise reasonable people have been influenced and believe that this is a good idea."

In this article, Larry Sanger did not touch on the Wikipedia issue. But, of course, the article has become another "stone in the garden" of Wikipedia. Larry Sanger has some video speeches in which he directly criticises the position of Wikipedia for its bias on the issue of COVID-19 and vaccination. Last month he had such a speech called "Wikipedia co-founder slams the website for having 'abandoned' the neutral point of view”.