Wikipedia has some limited value if you want to get some facts about Tiberius Caesar or Henry Agard Wallace or Leon Spinks, but on contemporary issues it has — like virtually everything else — a pronounced hard-Left, pro-jihad bias. The biographies of Islamic apologists (John Esposito, Karen Armstrong, Reza Aslan, etc.) are fawning press releases, while those of foes of jihad terror have lengthy “Criticism” sections that are filled with every negative statement about them and their work that can be found. And so it comes as no surprise that Wikipedia’s editors would deep-six an article about Tnuza Jamal Hassan, who recently set a series of fires on the campus of St. Catherine University in Minnesota, saying she wanted to “hurt people,” after exhorting Muslim students to join jihad terror groups such as al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or al-Shabaab. Hassan said she set the fires in revenge for supposed American atrocities on “Muslim land.” She wrote a letter to her roommates that police said contained “radical ideas about supporting Muslims and bringing back the caliphate.”

Despite all this, a Wikipedia editor says “she has not been charged with terrorism.” In reality, she faces a terror charge. And “Ms Hassan may or may not be having a mental health incident.” Of course! More of the global outbreak of mental illness. Wikipedia says “There is no source indicating that Hassan is a Muslim,” when there is an abundance of sources indicating that she is a Muslim.

Note also the Wikipedia editor saying “I removed the categories ‘Muslim terrorists’ (which is does [sic] not exist).” 30,000 jihad attacks worldwide since 9/11, and Wikipedia doesn’t even have a category for “Muslim terrorists.” This is the most vivid indication of all that when it comes to facts about the world today, Wikipedia is Leftist, agenda-driven, and worthless.

Wikipedia’s discussion on Tnuza Jamal Hassan’s jihad arson attack (thanks to Oliver):