TEHRAN – Wikipedia’s decision to lock its “Gaza genocide” article—after co-founder Jimmy Wales personally intervened—raises serious questions about the platform’s commitment to truth. 

Wales claimed the article violated neutrality by stating that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. But when legal bodies, human rights groups, and medical studies already support that conclusion, Wikipedia’s freeze looks less like balance and more like avoidance.

Since October 7, 2023, Israel’s military campaign has killed over 68,500 Palestinians in Gaza, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry. A Lancet study calculated over 3 million life-years lost, with children under 15 accounting for nearly one-third. These figures reflect systematic destruction—not incidental harm.

Inside Israel, two human rights organizations—B’Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights—have called Israel’s actions genocidal. B’Tselem has documented deliberate targeting of civilians and infrastructure, while the other rights group has published testimonies from Israeli soldiers implicating military command in war crimes.

Globally, the International Association of Genocide Scholars has affirmed that Israel’s conduct meets the legal definition of genocide. The International Court of Justice has ruled that Palestinians face a plausible risk of genocide, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is wanted by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity.

Wikipedia’s editorial freeze, justified as protecting neutrality, effectively blocks contributors from reflecting this growing legal and humanitarian consensus. Wales insists Wikipedia should not “adjudicate” the issue—but when adjudication is already underway in international courts, refusing to acknowledge it becomes a form of denial.

Neutrality should mean presenting all credible views—not suppressing well-documented ones. By shielding contested narratives from revision, Wikipedia risks becoming a platform that protects impunity rather than informs the public.