Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales abruptly ended an interview after growing increasingly frustrated with repetitive questioning about whether he should be labeled the “founder” or “co-founder” of the world’s largest open-source encyclopedia. The exchange, which took place on Tilo Jung’s “Jung & Naiv” podcast, quickly devolved into a tense back-and-forth that ultimately led Wales to walk out.

The confrontation began when Wales introduced himself plainly: “I’m Jimmy Wales, founder of Wikipedia.” Jung immediately pushed back, asking, “You’re the founder or co-founder?” Wales dismissed the distinction as irrelevant, calling it “the dumbest question in the world,” and emphasized that debating titles does nothing to change the history or impact of the project.

Jung continued to press, arguing that Wikipedia is built on facts and that the labeling should therefore be precise. Wales countered by stating that the debate is not a factual matter but a matter of interpretation, noting that he has long regarded the issue as insignificant. Despite Wales repeatedly saying the question “doesn’t matter,” Jung persisted, suggesting that the terminology somehow speaks to Wikipedia’s integrity.

After answering the same question multiple times, Wales reached his limit. “I’ve answered your question four times… You know what? I’m done.” He then ended the interview and walked out.

Wikipedia’s own entry historically credits Wales as co-founder alongside Larry Sanger, who helped organize the project in 2001, though Wales has consistently been its public face and primary financial backer, guiding the site’s creation and early development. For years, Wales has openly rejected attempts to drag him into semantic disputes over titles, insisting the focus should instead be on Wikipedia’s mission—and the global impact it continues to have.

The interview highlights a familiar pattern in modern media: hosts chasing viral moments rather than meaningful dialogue. While Wales attempted to maintain professionalism, the repetitive fixation on a minor label overshadowed any opportunity to discuss Wikipedia’s evolution or its role in today’s information landscape.

In an era when serious issues—from rising antisemitism to growing misinformation online—demand thoughtful conversation, the exchange serves as a reminder of how easily substance can be sacrificed for sensational clips. Wales left the room, but the moment underscores a larger question: what kind of journalism does the public truly deserve?