I think the goalpost is being moved. Your initial criteria was all about the resilency against state-sponsored disinformation attempts and the gaming of systems. For that criteria we don't have a comparable sample to look into when evaluating Wikipedia's.

By comparable, I'm meaning an alternative or competitor that had gained equal prominence as Wikipedia, in terms of Google search results, and the eyes of the whole world, again like what Pepsi is to Coca-Cola and vice versa. We would have something to compare to in terms of the criteria if Google has given their favoritism to one or more other platforms, instead of just Wikipedia.

> Your initial criteria was all about the resilency against state-sponsored disinformation attempts and the gaming of systems.

I believe you are mistaking me with someone else. Please pay attention to the usernames when you are re-reading the thread.

What i’m saying is what you describe as survivorship bias is not survivorship bias.