Wikipedia’s leftist bias is so deep that an anonymous administrator of the free, crowd-curated online encyclopedia recently got one of the site’s founders banned for the crime of . . . pointing out Wikipedia’s leftist bias.

By banning critic Larry Sanger — who invented the name “Wikipedia” some 25 years ago —the site proved his point: “Wokepedia” is dominated by thin-skinned, ideologically-slanted dweebs with fixed ideas about gender, Palestine, Covid and climate change, eager to suppress any deviation from the consensus they impose.

The principle behind Wikipedia is that open-source editing will course-correct the slant of individual contributors.

Oops: Factions of fanatic editors — possibly state-sponsored — have assumed control of the process, especially concerning Israel and its war against Hamas.

Sanger says that 62 mostly anonymous administrators — who have the authority to freeze pages and block editors — exercise dictatorial power over pet topics.

One of these administrators, who goes by TarnishedPath, led the campaign to ban Sanger.

This same administrator imposed a moratorium on edits of Wikipedia’s horribly biased Zionism article, pushed to defame feminist JK Rowling as transphobic and called the Wuhan lab leak hypothesis a “conspiracy theory” and “a political smear.”

Wikipedia maintains a list of acceptable sources for use when citing references, and there its bias hangs out for all to see.

Left-leaning outlets like CNN, The New York Times and the BBC are graded green for “reliable,” along with Qatari state media al-Jazeera and even the pay-for-hate Southern Poverty Law Center, while The Post, Newsmax, and The Federalist are written off as red, or “generally unreliable.”

Euro-Med Monitor, the outfit that invented and retailed the “IDF dog rape” hoax, and China Daily —  the organ of the Chinese Communist Party — get marked yellow for sometimes reliable.

You know, sometimes the CCP fudges the truth a little. . . but often it’s a real straight shooter!

Wikipedia is a microcosm of today’s knowledge economy, where extremists define their positions on gender, racism, climate change and so on as scientifically true, and thus undebatable.

The left’s drive to set the parameters of political and cultural debate is utterly authoritarian.

Opening up Wikipedia’s echo chamber would be a good first step toward bringing truth back into common discourse.