There are left-wing equivalents of PragerU (ex: the Gravel Institute) that are just as far away from Wikipedia as PragerU is.
If you get into the political area's of wikipeda, I think the bias of Wikipedia is pretty clear polar to that of PragerU.
If you stick to the pure hard sciences (physics as an example) and non-controversial events (like an earthquake) then sure they are unbiased
For example:
> Mohammed Zakir (also known as Meyra) was an Ethiopian Oromo nationalist. Regarded as "legendary Oromo hero", he is noted for his high contribution to keep the lights of Oromo nationalism shining after the martyrdom of his two hero colleagues called Elemo Qiltu and Ahmad Taqi ... the Oromos would never forget this early exemplary hero. And above all, history will always remember Meyra and his heroism.
> The term "Cultural Marxism" refers to a far-right antisemitic conspiracy theory which claims that Western Marxism is the basis of continuing academic and intellectual efforts to subvert Western culture.
I feel like a lot of actual marxists would disagree with this statement. People like Antonio Gramsci, who basically laid the foundations for cultural marxism in the early 20th century.
Oddly, if you read about Antonio Gramsci on wikipedia, they all but call him a cultural marxist: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Gramsci
> Gramsci is best known for his theory of cultural hegemony, which describes how the state and ruling capitalist class – the bourgeoisie – use cultural institutions to maintain power in capitalist societies.
Also, the last time I looked at the cultural marxism article, it simply said a "far-right conspiracy theory". Now they've somehow managed to roll up antisemitism in there too. Apparently it became antisemitic in just the past year or two!
As if. This article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor_genocide_question is still up despite having almost zero pertinent sources.[1] Calling that "polar" is nothing short of a stretch.
At most, Wikipedia could be said to have a neo-liberal bias, an ideology upheld by both of the US' political parties, based on policies alone and not on each individual voter's personal and nuanced adherence. The parties are wrongly assumed to be polar opposites on the political spectrum by most US citizens, but they're not.
