this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2025
133 points (94.0% liked)

Wikipedia

3807 readers
93 users here now

A place to share interesting articles from Wikipedia.

Rules:

Recommended:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Quote from him:

I assume good faith of everyone who has worked on this Gaza “genocide” article. At present, the lede and the overall presentation state, in Wikipedia’s voice, that Israel is committing genocide, although that claim is highly contested.

A neutral approach would begin with a formulation such as: “Multiple governments, NGOs, and legal bodies have described or rejected the characterization of Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide.”

Respect for Jimmy Wales 📉📉

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CautiousCharacter@awful.systems 30 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Do you take the same broad-minded approach to Holocaust denial? Vaccine misinformation? Intelligent design?

[–] FishFace@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I take the same approach, yes: where there is well-established consensus, Wikipedia should state that as fact. Where there is disagreement with the consensus, it should be noted proportionately.

But there is no lack of consensus on the things you mention.

[–] kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The genocide of Gazans is in the same place: a few ideologically-motivated crazies arguing for the side that is obviously both factually and morally bankrupt.

[–] FishFace@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

I agree it's ideologically motivated, but that doesn't affect the fact that there's a lack of consensus. There are serious governments and academics and commentators who disagree.

Probably in time they will see the truth but that's not for Wikipedia to predict.