Sure, it's not hard. Notes inline, rewrite after.

English (language not kingdom) Wikipedia has become a party organ* for whatever they call themselves, [note: incoherent to assign partyship here given the footnote lack-of-definition; implies a level of organization you've failed to demonstrate] those people who took over and ruined philosophy, history, sociology, linguistics, anthropology, et al departments of universities [note: strong claim, not backed up or even defined] (get rid of dead white males and anything they ever wrote! [note: hyperbolic, readers who don't agree are now more inclined to assume the rest of the text is also exaggerated]) to allow only deconstructive, post modernist, existentialist, nihilist, anti-western, socialist, personal truth and lived experience [note: buzzword soup, no substance except to readers who already share sentiments]; the same people who are now battering down the gates of science and technology (remember Shut Down Tech day? [note: no, and googling it returns results that are non-obviously connected to your concepts here; clarity would help your message]) because believing there is "the right answer" to a problem is itself problematic, an expression of white privilege [note: I live in academia and have never seen this formulation. if hyperbole, not conducive to persuasion (see above)]. Math should allow many answers depending on the student's truth and lived experience [note: never seen this in any math class, citations would help]. And they shouldn't have to turn in their work "on time", that oppressive white western male notion [note: same as previous]. The same people are are marching in the streets to say that mass murder and terrorism are morally justifiable expressions of yearning for a brighter future [note: references here would help, unless this is israel/palestine partisanship in either direction, in which case it's a distraction].

This is not my personal original research, the "other" cofounder of wikipedia (along with The Outlaw Jimmy Wales [note: much of your audience was not even born when this movie came out, more distractions]) says the same https://nypost.com/2021/07/16/wikipedia-co-founder-says-site...

Wikipedia btw raises tons of money, they are rolling in cash. Why do they keep begging you for more with interstitials? Because they have a number of woke "diversity", "equity", and "inclusion" projects they are dumping your money into[note: unable to find reference to these expenditures in public reporting, either in form 990 or annual report. not clear what things like "project rewrite" cost. if you know, better to cite hard facts]. It has nothing to do with making wikipedia better.

*party organ as in: The Nation, volume 180, number 9, page 173: “Modern armed forces cannot be built without heavy industry,” the People’s Daily, the central organ of the Chinese Communist Party, has remarked pointedly.

rewrite:

English Wikipedia specifically is largely under the control of left-wing participants who are applying their political preferences to editorial and policy decisions. This is a situation which has held in academia for some time[0], and I don't think their decision-making is based on neutrally representing matters or rigorous factual correctness. One of Wikipedia's cofounders left the organization, and has been sounding alarms about the political biases that have overwhelmed the operation of the site[1]. I have reason to believe they're spending Foundation money in furtherance of their political goals[2] instead of pursuing the actual mission of Wikipedia, which is on-record as explicitly targeting neutrality[3]. Many of the politically-driven decisions being made in that organization are detrimental to the operation of the project and they're descended from a worldview with whose priorities I strongly disagree and are detrimental to society at large.

0 - [note: I don't have a reference for this claim but presumably you do; this is where it would go]

1 - https://nypost.com/2021/07/16/wikipedia-co-founder-says-site...

2 - [note: I don't have a reference for this claim but presumably you do; this is where it would go]

3 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Purpose Specifically: The goal of a Wikipedia article is to present a neutrally written summary of existing mainstream knowledge in a fair and accurate manner with a straightforward, "just-the-facts style".

end of rewrite

I don't really know anything about Wikipedia politics; the only thing I do know is they are indeed flush with cash, which is the main reason I don't donate. I do know a bit about academia, since that's where I work. My opinions there might be affected by the fact that I work in a discipline which is heavily mathematics-based, rather than in the social fields.

I hope this helps you understand which parts of your message could be compromising your intentions and what people mean when they're talking about tone.