I documented Wikipedia’s UAP bias. My post got 254 upvotes and 40K views in just 4 hours. Then r/UFOs deleted it. Then Wikipedia permanently banned me.

Uncovering Bias in Wikipedia’s UAP Coverage: A Personal Account of Censorship and Coordinated Control

In recent days, I undertook an investigation into the portrayal of Unidentified Aerial Phenomena (UAP) within Wikipedia’s article on the Disclosure Movement. What followed was a series of events revealing apparent bias, deliberate content manipulation, and coordinated efforts to silence criticism—culminating in my account being permanently banned from Wikipedia, and my critical post on Reddit being deleted within hours. Here, I share a detailed account of these events, supported by transparent evidence, and discuss the broader implications for information integrity and censorship.

Documenting Bias: What I Found

My focus was on the Wikipedia article Disclosure Movement. I reviewed the publicly available edit history to identify patterns of framing and language that may undermine the credibility of the movement and its advocates. Several key points stood out:

• Disparaging Language in the Opening Paragraph: The first sentences incorporate multiple dismissive terms—”conspiracy theories,” “so-called,” “allege,” and “prophecies”—stacked in a manner that seems designed to pre-emptively discredit the subject. The narrative frames the movement’s beliefs as involving “demons” and “time travelers,” which appears to mock the serious efforts of government whistleblowers and researchers, portraying them as fringe or cult-like rather than credible.

• Alterations to Testimony Claims: The original phrasing stated that Luis Elizondo “testified under oath” before Congress. This was a significant distinction, indicating sworn legal testimony. Months ago, the wording was quietly changed to “accused,” a shift that substantially diminishes Elizondo’s official standing. This subtle edit alters the perception from a formal legal act to an informal accusation.

• Misrepresentation of Official Terminology: Official agencies—including the Pentagon, AARO, and congressional hearings—use specific language such as “non-human intelligence.” These references were replaced with casual terms like “space aliens,” which reduces professional terminology to sensationalist headlines, undermining the matter’s seriousness.

• Selective Inclusion and Omission of Key Figures: David Grusch, a former senior intelligence officer who testified under oath, was omitted from recent statements. Conversely, Elizondo’s name remains, suggesting a targeted effort to emphasize certain narratives while minimizing others.

• Framing the Movement as Conspiratorial: The article’s