Jimmy Wales calls for a 'neutral approach' to the page, which referred to the 'ongoing, intentional, and systematic destruction of the Palestinian people'.
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2025/11/4/why-did-wikipedia-cofounder-block-edits-to-the-gaza-genocide-page
Posted by SpontaneousFlame
10 comments
Ummm.. because it’s BS. Obviously. What did you think it was?
Jimmy Wales appears to be a great admirer of Israel. Broke his own WP:NPOV it seems to push his own political bias
His action likely irreparably damaged the credibility of Wikipedia as more and more American-based tech and media fall under the control or sway of the MAGA-Zionist alliance
I know this line. First, you make up a horrible lie, then you present a couple of “objective”, “neutral” people of “balanced” opinions, who say a bit of the truth, and a bit of the horrible lie.
Then you move the needle, move it and move it for as long as necessary, until none of the truth remains.
I’m too young to remember a different playbook, this is how far-right propaganda has always introduced its topics.
Because, despite what the tiktok gobblers would like to believe, no international body has officially acknowledged that a genocide is occurring.
Wikipedia isn’t the place for your feelings or “I think”s, it’s for factual information.
To be fair I think no recent incidents with strong opinions on both sides should have wikipedia articles… most if them are full of bias opinions and use bad sources and contradictions. I don’t mean this one specificity as I didn’t read it but something I noticed in general. Probably waiting for like 10years or something till all evidence was reviewed would be a smart move for an encyclopedia… for recent news people should just read news articles instead
Look. Here’s the game:
The UN definition of “genocide” is absurdly overbroad AND selectively applied.
Wales is entirely correct.
The worst part is that activists are destroying Wikipedia credibility for nothing. Do you really think Israel is going to let itself experience a real genocide because you accuse it of a fake one?
You’re destroying the credibility of Wikipedia for nothing. Everybody can see this madness for what it is.
Wales’ conduct here is very dicey, but just to be clear, [the edit block is coincidental and unrelated to his intervention.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gaza_genocide#This_is_on_the_news)
For those who aren’t Wikipedians or didn’t see the update in the article: Jimmy Wales didn’t block edits, another admin did over unrelated edit warring, people just assumed that he did because he made his talk page post around the same time. Also the block has expired now anyways.
In the interest of avoiding the primary argument, Im going to belt this opinion out for everyone sitting in the cheap seats;
*There is no such thing as an unbiased source.* Just because a source is biased doesn’t mean it’s incorrect or unreliable, especially if the topic of conversation changes.
This statement is important to remember when you examine information from controversial topics online, where segments of information are contexualized, exaggerated, undercut, or mixed in with “half truths”
Its important to not just understand *what* information the writer is trying to communicate, but *why* and *how* they are trying to communicate it. And no, the correct answers are not “they are being paid to” and “by lying.”
In particular, wikipedia is not unreliable because they fail to uphold their “unbiased reporting” rules, they are unreliable because Encyclopedia’s are an innately terrible format for understanding specifics of an event or topic.
> However, he continued: “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 characterisation of Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide,’” he added.
> Several major international bodies, including the United Nations, have asserted that Israel’s assault on Gaza is a genocide. This view has been backed by human rights organisations and scholars.
Wales: “At present, the lede and overall presentation state, in Wikipedia’s voice, is that the earth is a globe, though that claim is highly contested. This is a violation of WP:NPOV (Wikipedia Neutral Point of View) and WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV (Wikipedia Attribute Point of View) that requires immediate correction.”
Comments are closed.