Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia row erupts as Jimmy Wales intervenes on 'Gaza genocide' page

thenational.scot

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 124 posts

Re: Wikipedia row erupts as Jimmy Wales intervenes on 'Gaza genocide' page

#21

Post by nsp »

embedding-shape wrote: post #18
skilled wrote: post #3

This was not linked in the article, so here is what Jimmy wrote in the talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gaza_genocide#Statement_f...

Thank you for sharing that, turns out to be a lot more measured and balanced than the news article makes it out to be. Damn media always fueling the fires rather than spreading understanding and clarify. I think both sides seems to be raising good points, and probably the truth and more balanced view sits in the middle. I continued reading through the talk page and eventually come across this: > the United States gov…

It's a congressional inquiry, the claim is that the editors are biased against Israel. https://www.commondreams.org/news/house-gop-investigates-wik...

Re: Wikipedia row erupts as Jimmy Wales intervenes on 'Gaza genocide' page

#23

Post by embedding-shape »

ekjhgkejhgk wrote: post #8

[flagged]

> I say "it's only highly contested by Israel".

There seems to be a few governments, not just Israel, that doesn't consider it a genocide. As far as I can tell, most governments, especially western ones, do consider it a genocide at this point though.

But the mere fact that it's contested probably means Wikipedia shouldn't posit one of the positions as true, even though I personally believe it to be a genocide too.

Re: Wikipedia row erupts as Jimmy Wales intervenes on 'Gaza genocide' page

#24

Post by tantalor »

ekjhgkejhgk wrote: post #8

[flagged]

It is mentioned in the article, but buried pretty deep:

> The Israeli government ... denying that their military operations constitute genocide.

You have to scroll pretty far to find it.

I think Jimbo is saying, NPOV would have that assertion much higher, even in the lede.

Re: Wikipedia row erupts as Jimmy Wales intervenes on 'Gaza genocide' page

#25

Post by ekjhgkejhgk »

viccis wrote: post #19
ekjhgkejhgk wrote: post #8

[flagged]

Exactly. There's another 20th century genocide that is "highly contested" in specific odious circles, but there's no reason to present that opposing viewpoint in an encyclopedic treatment of it, given mounds of evidence of intent and outcomes for both.

Yes, the Holocaust is also "highly contested".

Re: Wikipedia row erupts as Jimmy Wales intervenes on 'Gaza genocide' page

#26

Post by embedding-shape »

nsp wrote: post #21
embedding-shape wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for sharing that, turns out to be a lot more measured and balanced than the news article makes it out to be. Damn media always fueling the fires rather than spreading understanding and clarify. I think both sides seems to be raising good points, and probably the truth and more balanced view sits in the middle. I continued reading through the talk page and eventually come across this: > the United States gov…

It's a congressional inquiry, the claim is that the editors are biased against Israel. https://www.commondreams.org/news/house-gop-investigates-wik...

> the editors are biased against Israel

But so what? Is that unlawful in the US somehow today? That sounds absolutely bananas to be honest, aren't people supposed to have "true" freedom of speech, including being allowed to be biased against or for Israel?

Re: Wikipedia row erupts as Jimmy Wales intervenes on 'Gaza genocide' page

#27

Post by viccis »

trhway wrote: post #20

[flagged]

Hamas carried out executions of a few dozen ranking members of opposition groups that had been carrying out attacks and aid banditry against civilians, at the behest of and with the funding of the Israeli government. This is not a "genocide"

Re: Wikipedia row erupts as Jimmy Wales intervenes on 'Gaza genocide' page

#29

Post by Centigonal »

embedding-shape wrote: post #18
skilled wrote: post #3

This was not linked in the article, so here is what Jimmy wrote in the talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Gaza_genocide#Statement_f...

Thank you for sharing that, turns out to be a lot more measured and balanced than the news article makes it out to be. Damn media always fueling the fires rather than spreading understanding and clarify. I think both sides seems to be raising good points, and probably the truth and more balanced view sits in the middle. I continued reading through the talk page and eventually come across this: > the United States gov…

Here are more details on this: https://truthout.org/articles/house-republicans-investigate-...

Here is the letter from two US congressmen, requesting information from Wikipedia, including "Records showing identifying and unique characteristics of accounts (such as names, IP addresses, registration dates, user activity logs) for editors subject to actions by [Wikipedia's arbitration committee]": https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/08272...

Re: Wikipedia row erupts as Jimmy Wales intervenes on 'Gaza genocide' page

#30

Post by viccis »

ekjhgkejhgk wrote: post #25
viccis wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. There's another 20th century genocide that is "highly contested" in specific odious circles, but there's no reason to present that opposing viewpoint in an encyclopedic treatment of it, given mounds of evidence of intent and outcomes for both.

Yes, the Holocaust is also "highly contested".

I was referring to the Armenian genocide, whose primary perpetrator refuses to acknowledge it, with the support of Western governments.
Post reply on HN