It’s a good idea. But it looks like it’s more likely to create a groupthink than a diversity of ideas. A single way of thinking becomes dominant and all others are labelled low-credibility by the algorithm.

I was thinking of the opposite. All ideas have equal status. You can read the left-wing encyclopedia or the right-wing one, or any other one. A lot of the content will be the same but some will be different. You won’t get filter-bubbled so easily, because you can always link to the other one.

You could even have an agregator, where you can see which parts of a certain article are disputed by different instances, and click between different versions.

Another good thing would be a comment section - like a reddit-style discussion under each article - not like the discussion pages wiki has today. Something that’s not hard to find, and where the “best” comments/criticisms of the article are at the top.