Israel–Palestine
Hamas
2 confirmed rewrite episodes; the largest by persistence-weighted mass had a 23.3% durable-spine drop. 2 questions out of 3 have compatible detail differences.
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 ↗Largest by persistence-weighted mass: 23.3% durable-spine drop. See Rewrite for exact revision receipts.
Different websites cited: 187 → 159. 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?
Editors spent a lot of energy undoing each other’s work (lots of reverts). A loud fight does not prove anyone is biased. About 14,131 recorded revisions in the measure.
Who wrote today’s text?
Half of the wording still on the page is about 2.0 years old or newer. 67.4% was written in the last 3 years. The ten most active accounts wrote 51.0% of what is there now (authorship is more spread out; 605 different accounts overall). Snapshot data on this page runs through 2026-01-01.This is background only — a small group of writers is common on specialist pages.
Available evidence: Rewrite, Vocabulary, Citations, Framing, Facts, Versions.
2 confirmed rewrite episodeA bounded window in which established wording was substantially replaced.s
Events bounded by stable revisions where long-lived wording was substantially replaced.
Snapshot corpus through 2026-01-01 (revision 1330038771).
Candidates and exact outcomes
The detector scored 24 interval rows and sent 3 candidate windows to exact checking: 2 confirmed, 1 rejected. A candidate window can span multiple interval rows, so rows marked as candidates do not equal the rewrite episode count.
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 scoring24 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.2 rewrite episodes confirmedRevision-level checking found the required durable wording replacement.
- 2003-01-01Loss 14.3%57 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2004-01-01Loss 22.2%337 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2005-01-01Loss 41.7%1,259 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2006-01-01Loss 19.0%1,355 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2007-01-01Loss 61.0%7,115 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2008-01-01Loss 40.8%9,992 removed · 0 added PWRConfirmed candidate window: 2007-01-01 → 2011-01-01
- 2009-01-01Loss 37.4%13,896 removed · 0 added PWRConfirmed candidate window: 2007-01-01 → 2011-01-01
- 2010-01-01Loss 36.1%17,295 removed · 0 added PWRConfirmed candidate window: 2007-01-01 → 2011-01-01
- 2011-01-01Loss 41.6%27,448 removed · 0 added PWRConfirmed candidate window: 2007-01-01 → 2011-01-01
- 2012-01-01Loss 8.6%7,198 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2013-01-01Loss 4.3%5,452 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2014-01-01Loss 5.8%9,965 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2015-01-01Loss 7.6%16,665 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2016-01-01Loss 1.7%4,561 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2017-01-01Loss 29.0%94,346 removed · 0 added PWRRejected candidate window: 2016-01-01 → 2017-01-01
- 2018-01-01Loss 2.0%5,855 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2019-01-01Loss 0.8%2,859 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2020-01-01Loss 1.6%6,738 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2021-01-01Loss 17.0%82,635 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2022-01-01Loss 1.9%9,637 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2023-01-01Loss 1.4%8,344 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
- 2024-01-01Loss 35.9%243,027 removed · 0 added PWRConfirmed candidate window: 2023-01-01 → 2025-01-01
- 2025-01-01Loss 55.5%291,036 removed · 0 added PWRConfirmed candidate window: 2023-01-01 → 2025-01-01
- 2026-01-01Loss 6.7%20,494 removed · 0 added PWRMeasured: no anomaly threshold crossed
Exact candidate decisions
Every coarse lead and its revision-level decision, including rejected candidates. RedlinesA before-and-after view showing wording removed and added. compare the full candidate window.
| Candidate window | Exact outcome | Coarse signal |
|---|---|---|
| 2007-01-01 → 2011-01-01View redline | Confirmed: 28.7% durable-spine dropExact pair: 2007-06-19T21:24:02Z → 2007-06-19T23:29:09Z · 2.1 hours | coarse interval · 42% persistence-weighted loss · 68,631 PWR massThe absolute persistence-weighted amount of text lost. |
| 2016-01-01 → 2017-01-01View redline | Rejected: 10.6% durable-spine drop, below the required 20.0%Exact pair: 2016-02-09T18:03:03Z → 2016-02-09T18:11:00Z | coarse interval · 29% persistence-weighted loss · 94,346 PWR massThe absolute persistence-weighted amount of text lost. |
| 2023-01-01 → 2025-01-01View redline | Confirmed: 23.3% durable-spine dropExact pair: 2023-10-10T12:26:45Z → 2023-10-10T12:28:47Z · 2 minutes | coarse interval · 55% persistence-weighted loss · 534,063 PWR massThe absolute persistence-weighted amount of text lost. |
Exact-event attribution: revisions 1179484672 → 1179484852
12,749 tokensOne tracked unit of text, usually a word or punctuation mark. removed · 61 surviving replacement tokens · Iskandar323 was associated with 100.0% of removals · Iskandar323 was the origin author of 100.0% of surviving replacement text.
Exact-event attribution: revisions 139292392 → 139315984
6,517 tokensOne tracked unit of text, usually a word or punctuation mark. removed · 83 surviving replacement tokens · Organ123 was associated with 100.0% of removals · Organ123 was the origin author of 100.0% of surviving replacement text.
Attribution describes public revision-history associations and origin authorship. It does not establish bias, motive, or misconduct.
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 2023-01-01 -> 2024-01-01 (around L1 pivot ~2023-01-01). Rough word count: 15,176 → 13,406. Overall: small vocabulary change.
Used more afterward
- visited0 → 6
- hostages0 → 4
- armistice0 → 3
- conducted0 → 3
- indifference0 → 3
- saudis0 → 3
- significantly0 → 3
- proposal1 → 7
- principles2 → 9
- festival1 → 5
- kibbutz1 → 5
- poll1 → 5
Used less afterward
- spokesman11 → 0
- holocaust22 → 1
- excel6 → 0
- fbi6 → 0
- populated6 → 0
- ifj5 → 0
- school5 → 0
- shields13 → 1
- americans4 → 0
- boy4 → 0
- densely4 → 0
- goldstone4 → 0
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 2022-01-01 → 2026-01-01 (across the L1 pivot ~2023-01-01): 103 websites were cited more (or newly), 128 less (or dropped). Number of footnotes: 523 → 522. Different websites: 187 → 159.
Mix of citation types: news 45%, web 26%, book 23%, journal 5%, report 0% → news 43%, web 28%, book 23%, journal 6%, report 0%.
| cited more often | before → after |
|---|---|
| aljazeera.com | 9 → 21 |
| bbc.com | 3 → 10 |
| apnews.com | 0 → 7 |
| jstor.org | 0 → 6 |
| cnn.com | 2 → 7 |
| washingtonpost.com | 6 → 11 |
| timesofisrael.com | 14 → 19 |
| heinonline.org | 0 → 4 |
| palestine-studies.org | 0 → 4 |
| aljazeera.net | 0 → 4 |
| france24.com | 0 → 4 |
| haaretz.com | 22 → 26 |
| cited less often | before → after |
|---|---|
| books.google.com | 126 → 96 |
| jpost.com | 30 → 13 |
| ynetnews.com | 18 → 4 |
| maannews.net | 8 → 0 |
| news.bbc.co.uk | 21 → 13 |
| mfa.gov.il | 6 → 0 |
| idfblog.com | 6 → 0 |
| nytimes.com | 17 → 11 |
| jta.org | 5 → 0 |
| news.xinhuanet.com | 4 → 0 |
| state.gov | 4 → 0 |
| telegraph.co.uk | 9 → 5 |
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.
Across this narrow window (surrounding the October 7, 2023 attack), the English lead remained textually unchanged between the BEFORE and AFTER revisions. Other editions showed brief, mostly transient edits: Arabic saw a vandalism-like insertion predicting Hamas's disappearance, later presumably reverted, which sits outside and contradicts the stable English framing. French added a substantive historical claim about Israeli support for Hamas's early development to weaken the PLO, a detail absent from English. Hebrew and Russian showed no substantive textual change in this window. A persistent cross-edition divergence unrelated to the time window is the framing of Hamas as 'terrorist' in English versus more neutral 'resistance movement' framing in Arabic, reflecting differing national/political perspectives rather than temporal drift within this snapshot.
Compared matched historical revisions around the confirmed rewrite from 2023-01-01 to 2025-01-01.
Languages compared: en, ar, he, ru, fr.
Version receipts: en: en before / en after · ar: ar before / ar after · he: he before / he after · ru: ru before / ru after · fr: fr before / fr after
| topic | how they compare | English change | other language(s) change | languages |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AR edition briefly added vandalism/editorial statement predicting Hamas's disappearance | difference persisted | Before: Hamas (, ; , ; an acronym of , ) is a Palestinian political and terrorist organization that currently governs the Gaza Strip, one of the two Palestinian territories... “Hamas (, ; , ; an acronym of , ) is a Palestinian political and terrorist organization that currently governs the Gaza Strip” After: Hamas (, ; , ; an acronym of , ) is a Palestinian political and terrorist organization that currently governs the Gaza Strip, one of the two Palestinian territories... “Hamas (, ; , ; an acronym of , ) is a Palestinian political and terrorist organization that currently governs the Gaza Strip” | Before: حركة حماس أو (حركة المقاومة الإسلامية...) هي حركة، إسلامية سياسية سُنية، فلسطينية، مسلحة، مقاومة للاحتلال الصهيوني... “حركة حماس أو (حركة المقاومة الإسلامية، وتسمى اختصاراً حماس) هي حركة، إسلامية سياسية سُنية، فلسطينية، مسلحة، مقاومة للاحتلال الصهيوني” After: حماس منظمة إرهابية، وسوف تختفي قريبا من الإنسانية. حركة حماس أو (حركة المقاومة الإسلامية...) “حماس منظمة إرهابية، وسوف تختفي قريبا من الإنسانية.” | AR |
| FR edition added detail on Israeli government's early support for Hamas to weaken PLO | English moved away | Before: Hamas was established soon after the first Intifada in 1987. Campaigning on using armed resistance to end the Israeli occupation, it won the 2006 Palestinian legislative election... “no quotation” After: Hamas was established soon after the first Intifada in 1987. Campaigning on using armed resistance to end the Israeli occupation, it won the 2006 Palestinian legislative election... “no quotation” | Before: Créé en 1987 par Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi et Mohammed Taha, tous trois issus des Frères musulmans, sa charte affirme que... “no quotation” After: Le développement du Hamas est d'abord soutenu par le gouvernement israélien, lequel entend ainsi affaiblir l'Organisation de libération de la Palestine. “no quotation” | FR |
| Framing of Hamas as terrorist organization vs. political/resistance movement | difference persisted | Before: Hamas (, ; , ; an acronym of , ) is a Palestinian political and terrorist organization that currently governs the Gaza Strip “is a Palestinian political and terrorist organization that currently governs the Gaza Strip” After: Hamas (, ; , ; an acronym of , ) is a Palestinian political and terrorist organization that currently governs the Gaza Strip “is a Palestinian political and terrorist organization that currently governs the Gaza Strip” | Before: حركة حماس أو (حركة المقاومة الإسلامية، وتسمى اختصاراً حماس) هي حركة، إسلامية سياسية سُنية، فلسطينية، مسلحة، مقاومة للاحتلال الصهيوني “هي حركة، إسلامية سياسية سُنية، فلسطينية، مسلحة، مقاومة للاحتلال الصهيوني” After: حركة حماس أو (حركة المقاومة الإسلامية، وتسمى اختصاراً حماس) هي حركة، إسلامية سياسية سُنية، فلسطينية، مسلحة، مقاومة للاحتلال الصهيوني “هي حركة، إسلامية سياسية سُنية، فلسطينية، مسلحة، مقاومة للاحتلال الصهيوني” | AR, HE, RU, FR |
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: 0 contradict · 2 compatible difference · 1 agree · 0 not enough said.
| question | today |
|---|---|
| In what year was Hamas founded, and by whom? | agree |
| All agree on 1987, founded by Ahmed Yassin (ar adds co-founders). | |
| Which governments or bodies have officially designated Hamas (or its military wing) a terrorist organization? | differ |
| Core list overlaps (US, EU, UK, Japan, Canada, Australia, NZ, Israel); en/ar add extra countries or OAS not in he. | |
| What does Hamas's founding charter state regarding the state of Israel? | differ |
| he gives specific charter content (waqf, destruction of Israel) while en/ar decline to quote specifics, though not contradicting it. | |
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: Q38799.
| language | comparison point | article title | version | when | text used (chars) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| en | before | Hamas | open version 1179484672 | 2023-10-10T12:26:45Z | 2,081 |
| en | after | Hamas | open version 1179484852 | 2023-10-10T12:28:47Z | 2,081 |
| ar | before | حركة حماس | open version 64994187 | 2023-10-08T21:45:18Z | 1,796 |
| ar | after | حركة حماس | open version 65004918 | 2023-10-10T12:39:07Z | 1,848 |
| he | before | חמאס | open version 37251920 | 2023-10-08T23:15:29Z | 2,735 |
| he | after | חמאס | open version 37259815 | 2023-10-10T12:36:58Z | 2,735 |
| ru | before | ХАМАС | open version 133504554 | 2023-10-09T15:52:46Z | 1,075 |
| ru | after | ХАМАС | open version 133536866 | 2023-10-11T10:14:53Z | 1,075 |
| fr | before | Hamas | open version 208584149 | 2023-10-09T22:10:49Z | 2,095 |
| fr | after | Hamas | open version 208602289 | 2023-10-10T16:51:13Z | 2,250 |