Wikipedia Rewrites Israel Entry to Assert Genocide as Fact

Wikipedia has revised the lead section of its main article on Israel to assert that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, a significant change in language that has intensified criticism of bias and weakened claims of neutrality at the world’s largest online encyclopedia.

The edit, made on December 11, appears in the opening paragraphs of the article, the most visible and frequently read section. The new wording states that following the October 7, 2023 attacks, Israel “began committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza,” presenting the claim as established fact rather than allegation. The sentence links directly to a separate article titled “Gaza genocide,” reinforcing the framing.

Until recently, Wikipedia’s Israel page described genocide as an accusation made by certain human rights organizations and United Nations officials, while explicitly avoiding a definitive characterization. That distinction has now been removed.

The change is notable because no international court or legal body has ruled that Israel has committed genocide. The International Court of Justice has stated that the risk of genocide in Gaza is “plausible,” a preliminary legal threshold, but has not determined that genocide has occurred. The International Criminal Court has pursued investigations related to war crimes and crimes against humanity, but has not issued genocide charges as of late 2025.

The linked “Gaza genocide” article has itself drawn criticism for failing to meet standards of neutrality. Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has publicly said the page does not meet the platform’s editorial requirements and requires significant correction, citing broader challenges in maintaining balance on politically charged subjects.

Concerns over Wikipedia’s handling of Israel-related content have also prompted scrutiny from U.S. lawmakers. Earlier this year, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform opened an inquiry into whether coordinated networks or foreign actors have influenced Wikipedia articles related to Israel and the Middle East.

That inquiry followed findings that a small group of highly active editors exerted disproportionate influence over Israel-related entries, repeatedly editing, coordinating internally, and shaping narratives over long periods of time. Critics argue that this pattern undermines Wikipedia’s claim to reflect broad consensus rather than activist positioning.

Despite internal debate and external criticism, the revised language remains in place. The article now presents a legal and moral conclusion that has not been reached by any court as an uncontested fact.

For critics, the issue is no longer about wording preferences or editorial nuance, but about whether Wikipedia is abandoning its foundational commitment to neutrality in favor of political judgment.