Query
Find articles
Pick a keyword, optionally a second one to combine it with (and, or, either but not both, or but not), then narrow the articles down by text, source and time range. Keywords update the results right away; filters apply with their button.
Query
Who picked it up when
It was already in the news on Oct 21, when this period starts, so who reported it first is not shown. No right-leaning outlet mentioned it.
One row per source with a matching article, from the most left-leaning on top: a dot for each article, on a bar for each stretch of its coverage (a pause of more than 24 hours starts a new one). Hover or tap a dot for the headline, click it to read the article.
Source lean:leftcenterright
Source leans by Media Bias/Fact Check.
Results
2 articles mention Wikipedia in the last 7 days (Oct 21 to Oct 27).
| Article | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Semafor | How Wikipedia shaped the webSemafor A “jaunty new history” of the creation, cultivation, and impact of Wikipedia. | 0.90● | |
| The Guardian | ‘A difficult line’: meet the editors tackling Wikipedia’s arms trade pagesThe Guardian Volunteers and new recruits come together for ‘wikithon’ to put more detail about industry into public domain “Anyone can edit Wikipedia,” the adage goes. But, it turns out, a relatively small number actually do. What is worthy of a digital page in the world’s largest and most-read encyclopedia is decided by roughly 270,000 active volunteers, enthusiasts who populate the online resource with information on anything from 19th-century medicine to TikTok trends. Inevitably, some subjects are sidelined – the global south, notable women – but a new batch of Wikipedian recruits are waging war on one neglected topic: the arms industry. Last week, in a classroom in central London, two dozen volunteers huddled around laptops and free servings of vegan Ethiopian food for what is known as a “wikithon”, an event of collective and in-person Wikipedia editing. Some were veteran editors in their 70s, others young students who had never registered an account before. But their targets include subjects such as Palantir, Project Maven and Nitro-Chem. Continue reading... | 0.70● |
Source leans by Media Bias/Fact Check.
Narrow further
Other keywords in the matching articles: the share of them that mention each, with the number of articles.
No other keyword appears in more than one of the matching articles.
Coverage by source
The share of each source's stories in the last 7 days that match the query, from left to right. Sort the table to reorder the bars.
Source lean:leftcenterright
Source leans by Media Bias/Fact Check.
| The Guardian | 0.2% | 1 | 609 |
| Semafor | 0.7% | 1 | 140 |
Coverage by lean
The share of stories that match the query, in the last 7 days, averaged over the outlets of each political lean with at least 3 stories. The groups differ in size, so a single outlet weighs more in the smaller ones.
- Left-leaning1 of 15 sources
- <0.1%
- Least biased1 of 8 sources
- 0.1%
- Right-leaning0 of 15 sources
- 0.0%
Lean index −3.6: covered more by left-leaning outlets
Each outlet at its MBFC bias score, from −10 (far left) to +10 (far right), as high as the share of its stories that match the query. The lean index is the average score of the outlets covering it, weighted by that share.
lean indexour sources' average (+0.4)leftcenterright
Bias scores by Media Bias/Fact Check.
1 source has no MBFC bias score and is not shown.
Source leans based on ratings by Media Bias/Fact Check.