Israel–Palestine
Gaza genocide
Wording shifted a little. 1 factual question out of 3 contradicts across languages.
Something to inspect — not a judgment of bias or bad faith.
Overview
Use this briefing to choose what to inspect. The tabs contain the underlying comparisons.
Open the live English Wikipedia article ↗The saved exact result does not match the current local corpus or detector thresholds. It is withheld until refreshed, rather than shown as a current finding.
Different websites cited: 188 → 230. We do not rate those sites. See Citations.
3 configured questions checked in more than one language. See Facts.
Compared around the rewrite window. See Framing.
Did editors fight over it?
The page was not dominated by back-and-forth undoing. A quiet rewrite can still matter — it just means few people fought it on the page. About 6,712 recorded revisions in the measure.
Who wrote today’s text?
Half of the wording still on the page is about 0.9 years old or newer. 100.0% was written in the last 3 years. The ten most active accounts wrote 66.2% of what is there now (authorship is more spread out; 323 different accounts overall). Snapshot data on this page runs through 2026-07-01.This is background only — a small group of writers is common on specialist pages.
Available evidence: Vocabulary, Citations, Framing, Facts, Versions.
Not available in this export: Rewrite. Missing coverage is not a negative finding.
Rewrite analysis needs refresh
The saved exact result does not match the current local corpus or detector thresholds. It is withheld until refreshed, rather than shown as a current finding.
Persistence-weighted changeThe share of wording lost, weighted so text that survived more snapshots counts more. by interval
Each row reports established wording lost, standing wording gained, and paired change as a replacement lead. The bar shows loss for continuity with earlier reports. Below-floor anomalies remain descriptive evidence but cannot receive exact confirmation. A coverage gap is shown descriptively but excluded from detector decisions. Candidate-window labels report the exact revision-level decision for the broader window containing that interval.
How the detector reached this state
- 1 · Coarse scanA snapshot comparison that finds candidate windows for closer inspection.Candidate signal foundThe coarse scan found a deletion-heavy window worth exact checking.
- 2 · Interval scoring6 intervals scoredThe bars below show persistence-weighted wording loss for each interval.
- 3 · Exact checkA revision-level test of whether a candidate window's durable spine collapsed.UnavailableNo current revision-level decision can be published.
- 2024-07-01Loss 20.9%1,910 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2025-01-01Loss 18.5%17,389 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2025-07-01Loss 34.1%72,939 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2026-01-01Loss 59.0%181,116 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2026-07-01Loss 2.6%6,640 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2026-07-01Loss 0.0%9 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
Which words grew or shrank?
Words that became more common or less common between the compared versions. Handy for noticing a shift in topic or tone — not a score of bias.
Comparing 2024-07-01 -> 2025-01-01 (around L1 pivot ~2024-07-01). Rough word count: 6,012 → 9,700. Overall: wording shifted a little.
Used more afterward
- accusation0 → 9
- august0 → 8
- estimate0 → 7
- september0 → 7
- indirect0 → 6
- months0 → 6
- assembly0 → 5
- recent0 → 5
- third0 → 5
- care0 → 4
- countries0 → 4
- displacement0 → 4
Used less afterward
- romania5 → 0
- alleged8 → 2
- ngo4 → 1
- achieve3 → 1
- constitute3 → 1
- publications3 → 1
- verse3 → 1
- calculated5 → 2
- real5 → 2
- textbook6 → 3
- engaging4 → 2
- held4 → 2
These are the standout words, not a full dictionary of the article. Boring markup words are filtered out. Treat this as a hint, not a conclusion.
How the footnotes changed
How the article's own footnotes changed across the rewrite: which websites and books were cited more or less. We only show the mix — we do not rate sources as good or bad.
Looking at 2024-07-01 → 2026-07-01 (across the L1 pivot ~2024-07-01): 178 websites were cited more (or newly), 95 less (or dropped). Number of footnotes: 451 → 617. Different websites: 188 → 230.
Mix of citation types: news 65%, web 24%, journal 10%, report 0%, press 0% → news 59%, web 26%, journal 10%, report 2%, book 2%, press 1%.
| cited more often | before → after |
|---|---|
| archive.today | 7 → 61 |
| theguardian.com | 45 → 97 |
| ohchr.org | 6 → 25 |
| bbc.com | 10 → 27 |
| middleeasteye.net | 11 → 27 |
| timesofisrael.com | 4 → 16 |
| apnews.com | 22 → 34 |
| nytimes.com | 16 → 28 |
| btselem.org | 0 → 12 |
| npr.org | 6 → 17 |
| cnn.com | 6 → 17 |
| reuters.com | 35 → 44 |
| cited less often | before → after |
|---|---|
| aljazeera.com | 139 → 107 |
| aa.com.tr | 13 → 0 |
| palestinechronicle.com | 10 → 2 |
| newrepublic.com | 8 → 0 |
| twitter.com | 6 → 0 |
| telegraph.co.uk | 6 → 1 |
| time.com | 10 → 6 |
| middleeastmonitor.com | 10 → 6 |
| thehill.com | 4 → 0 |
| rollingstone.com | 4 → 0 |
| truthout.org | 4 → 0 |
| anfenglish.com | 4 → 0 |
Counted from the article’s own footnotes. We list domains only — we do not call any source trustworthy or untrustworthy.
Cross-language lead comparison
How the opening of the article presents the topic in different languages. Disagreement is a reason to read carefully, not a final answer.
Both editions moved from an 'accusation' framing to a declarative genocide framing, showing parallel change. However, they now diverge sharply on core facts: English reports a Gaza Health Ministry toll of 66,148 by October 2025, while Arabic claims over 80,000 killed by the same date—a direct numeric contradiction. Healthcare worker deaths also diverge (Arabic cites 723 by Oct 2025; English's equivalent figure is absent, replaced by a health-centre destruction statistic). The ICJ ruling description diverges: English now omits the 'plausible intent' language present in Arabic, describing measures ordered instead. English has also expanded substantially with new content absent from Arabic—institutional genocide recognition and detailed famine/starvation data—reflecting English's greater elaboration during this window while Arabic retained more of the original 2024 structure with only date/number updates.
Compared matched historical revisions around the L1 candidate window from 2024-07-01 to 2026-01-01.
Languages compared: en, ar.
Version receipts: en: en before / en after · ar: ar before / ar after
| topic | how they compare | English change | other language(s) change | languages |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Definitional framing: accusation vs. established fact | parallel change | Before: The State of Israel has been accused of genocide against Palestinians during its invasion and bombing of the Gaza Strip. “The State of Israel has been accused of genocide against Palestinians during its invasion and bombing of the Gaza Strip.” After: The Gaza genocide is the ongoing, intentional, and systematic destruction of the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip carried out by Israel during the Gaza war. “The Gaza genocide is the ongoing, intentional, and systematic destruction of the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip carried out by Israel during the Gaza war.” | Before: اتُهمت إسرائيل بارتكاب جرائم إبادة جماعية ضد الشعب الفلسطيني في قطاع غزة خلال الحرب بين إسرائيل وحماس. “اتُهمت إسرائيل بارتكاب جرائم إبادة جماعية ضد الشعب الفلسطيني في قطاع غزة خلال الحرب بين إسرائيل وحماس.” After: الإبادة الجماعية لغزة هي التدمير والاستهداف الممنهج والمتعمد والمستمر للشعب الفلسطيني في قطاع غزة، والذي تنفذه إسرائيل خلال حرب غزة. “الإبادة الجماعية لغزة هي التدمير والاستهداف الممنهج والمتعمد والمستمر للشعب الفلسطيني في قطاع غزة، والذي تنفذه إسرائيل خلال حرب غزة.” | ar |
| Death toll figures | parallel change | Before: By mid-March 2024, the war had killed over 31,500 Palestinians “By mid-March 2024, the war had killed over 31,500 Palestinians” After: By October 2025, the Gaza Health Ministry had reported that at least 66,148 people in Gaza had been killed. “By October 2025, the Gaza Health Ministry had reported that at least 66,148 people in Gaza had been killed.” | Before: بحلول منتصف مارس/آذار 2024، قتلت القوات الإسرائيلية أكثر من 31,500 فلسطيني “بحلول منتصف مارس/آذار 2024، قتلت القوات الإسرائيلية أكثر من 31,500 فلسطيني” After: بحلول اكتوبر/2025 قتلت القوات الإسرائيلية أكثر من 80 الف فلسطيني “بحلول اكتوبر/2025 قتلت القوات الإسرائيلية أكثر من 80 الف فلسطيني” | ar |
| Healthcare worker death toll | parallel change | Before: By March 2024, 374 healthcare workers in Gaza had been killed. “By March 2024, 374 healthcare workers in Gaza had been killed.” After: As of May 2024, 84% of Gaza's health centres have been destroyed or damaged. “no quotation” | Before: وبحلول مارس/آذار 2024، قُتل 374 من العاملين في مجال الرعاية الصحية في غزة. “وبحلول مارس/آذار 2024، قُتل 374 من العاملين في مجال الرعاية الصحية في غزة.” After: وبحلول اكتوبر/2025، قُتل 723 من العاملين في مجال الرعاية الصحية في غزة. “وبحلول اكتوبر/2025، قُتل 723 من العاملين في مجال الرعاية الصحية في غزة.” | ar |
| ICJ plausibility ruling wording | English moved away | Before: Palestinians were recognised to have "plausible rights to protection from genocide" that faced a real risk of irreparable damage. “Palestinians were recognised to have "plausible rights to protection from genocide"” After: In January 2024, the court ordered Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent the commis “In January 2024, the court ordered Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent the commis” | Before: وفي حكم مؤقت وجدت محكمة العدل الدولية أن إسرائيل كانت تعمل في ظل نية معقولة لارتكاب أعمال الإبادة الجماعية “وفي حكم مؤقت وجدت محكمة العدل الدولية أن إسرائيل كانت تعمل في ظل نية معقولة لارتكاب أعمال الإبادة الجماعية” After: وفي حكم مؤقت وجدت محكمة العدل الدولية أن إسرائيل سعت في ظل نية معقولة لارتكاب أعمال الإبادة الجماعية “وفي حكم مؤقت وجدت محكمة العدل الدولية أن إسرائيل سعت في ظل نية معقولة لارتكاب أعمال الإبادة الجماعية” | ar |
| Recognition of genocide by institutions | English moved away | Before: not stated “no quotation” After: The genocide has been recognised by a United Nations special committee and commission of inquiry, the International Association of Genocide Scholars, multiple human rights groups, numerous genocide studies and international law scholars, and other experts. “The genocide has been recognised by a United Nations special committee and commission of inquiry, the International Association of Genocide Scholars, multiple human rights groups, numerous genocide studies and international law scholars, and other experts.” | Before: not stated “no quotation” After: not stated “no quotation” | ar |
| Famine and starvation details | English moved away | Before: not stated “no quotation” After: An Israeli blockade has heavily contributed to ongoing starvation and confirmed famine. As of August 2025, projections show about 641,000 people experiencing catastrophic levels “An Israeli blockade has heavily contributed to ongoing starvation and confirmed famine.” | Before: not stated “no quotation” After: not stated “no quotation” | ar |
Differences are invitations to read both sides — not a score of who is right.
Do the languages agree on basic facts?
Simple factual questions checked in several languages. Editions may agree, differ, contradict, or not say enough to tell. That is not a claim about who is right.
On the latest check, 3 questions produced: 1 contradict · 0 compatible difference · 2 agree · 0 not enough said.
| question | today |
|---|---|
| Which bodies, states, or scholars have characterized events in Gaza as genocide, and which reject that characterization? | agree |
| All editions agree it's a contested characterization with UN bodies, scholars, and rights groups affirming genocide while Israel and allied institutions reject it; lists differ in detail but are compatible. | |
| What casualty figures does the article cite? | contradict |
| Death tolls range widely (64,260–80,000+) and children killed figures differ substantially (18,457 vs 20,633 vs 25,000+), constituting numeric contradictions beyond mere emphasis differences. | |
| What is the status of genocide allegations in international legal proceedings (e.g. the ICJ)? | agree |
| All editions agree ICJ ordered provisional measures without a final ruling, with he/ar adding compatible details on ICC warrants and Israeli non-compliance. | |
These checks are starting points for a reader. They do not decide who is right.
Versions we used
These are the exact public Wikipedia versions behind the checks on this page. Open any link to read the original. Wikidata item: Q124086054.
| language | comparison point | article title | version | when | text used (chars) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| en | before | Gaza genocide | open version 1231914796 | 2024-06-30T23:45:05Z | 2,056 |
| en | after | Gaza genocide | open version 1330571299 | 2026-01-01T06:03:47Z | 3,000 |
| ar | before | الإبادة الجماعية لغزة | open version 67211953 | 2024-06-26T11:49:42Z | 1,238 |
| ar | after | الإبادة الجماعية لغزة | open version 73001181 | 2026-01-01T02:31:52Z | 1,292 |