The underlying premise that wikipedia has bias, yes. I think in terms of gender, and English language dominance this is a given. The difference would be about qualities of "side" in these two sided examples.
There is a false equivalence problem the blog doesn't acknowledge: do flat earther views demand equality in pages about orbital mechanics. When it comes to politics things are more nuanced but in the long view, we don't write history presenting a neutral view of losing candidates in general. Their beliefs of process and equity must get reflected, but do they deserve equal ranking? Must every contested election have "we was robbed" at equal size?
The tilden election stands out as one which I think gets it about right. Historians agree it was difficult.
Jfk and Nixon needs thought. There were shenanigans both sides. Equal shenanigans? Maybe it's too soon to say. (That's a Zhou enlai joke about the French revolution)