Larry Sanger, the co-founder of Wikipedia, also gives a number of examples of Wikipedia's bias in this article:
> when the crowd-based articles are substantially revised.
You literally just had to keep reading to find the cases where they do show bias
Re:Wikipedia is 20
by brendoelfrendo on Sunday January 10, 2021 @03:28AM
(#25712330)
That's just saying that highly-trafficked, highly-edited articles are going to be less biased than articles with fewer contributors or sources. That... just makes sense, to me; the more visible or relevant an article, the more people (and potentially experts) will weigh in, and the more crowd consensus will drive out the more blatant biases.
>Our study finds that crowd-based knowledge production does not result in articles with more biased than articles produced by experts when the crowd-based articles are substantially revised.