Jim Schuler wisely stated:
Might depend on tax law. If I remember correctly (it's been 15 years since I dealt with this), 501(c) and 501(c)(3) tax-exempt and private foundations can run afoul of the IRS if there is a clear indication of active discrimination.
But then also stated:
In this case, I don't see any evidence of an active policy of discrimination...
There actually *is* a fairly active policy of discrimination that's been carried out for the past few months.
Employees of public relations firms are not allowed to edit Wikipedia.
http://blog.bitepr.com/2006/08/jimmy_wales_on_.html
The IRS and the appropriate Attorneys General will certainly get involved when an organization operating with tax-deductible funding begins to administer itself in ways that run contrary to its stated public mission. The State of Florida's Division of Consumer Services was sufficiently concerned about Wikipedia's discrimination against
commercial interests (in light of the GFDL explicitly stating the license must not limit commercial use of the work), that it contacted Brad Patrick in late November.
The earlier comment by Earle Martin that "Wikipedia is a privately-operated members' club" is a sad statement of empirical evidence that the Wikipedia leadership has clearly lost sight of its being a 501(c)(3) non-profit entity that goes well beyond a private club.
(Still on a Wiki-break, but this list is just too fascinating.)