Zionism

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 2026-07-01 (revision 1362081133).

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 2024-07-01 -> 2025-01-01 (around L1 pivot ~2024-07-01). Rough word count: 9,892 → 14,171. Overall: wording shifted a little.

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): 55 websites were cited more (or newly), 86 less (or dropped). Number of footnotes: 385 → 195. Different websites: 121 → 94.

Mix of citation types: book 48%, web 27%, journal 17%, news 8% → book 55%, journal 24%, web 10%, news 10%, report 1%.

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.

No genuine temporal divergence was found: the English lead text is byte-identical between the BEFORE and AFTER revisions in this window, and the same holds for Arabic, Hebrew, Japanese, and Urdu editions (only a stray link was added in Hebrew, with no textual change). Thus any cross-edition differences identified—such as the AR/HE/JA/UR articles' differing framing of Zionism's origins, goals regarding Palestinian Arabs, characterization of 1948 events, and treatment of anti-Zionism—are static, pre-existing divergences rather than changes driven by the English rewrite. These reflect long-standing editorial differences in emphasis (e.g., Urdu and Arabic framing Zionism more critically via colonialism/ethnic cleansing language, while English's stable phrasing on 'as few Palestinian Arabs as possible' has no equivalent in the other editions) that persisted unchanged across the compared revisions.

Compared matched historical revisions around the confirmed rewrite from 2024-07-01 to 2026-01-01.

Languages compared: en, ar, he, ja, ur.

Version receipts: en: en before / en after · ar: ar before / ar after · he: he before / he after · ja: ja before / ja after · ur: ur before / ur after

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 · 0 compatible difference · 2 agree · 1 not enough said.

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: Q42388.