Quote from him:
I assume good faith of everyone who has worked on this Gaza “genocide” article. At present, the lede and the overall presentation state, in Wikipedia’s voice, that Israel is committing genocide, although that claim is highly contested.
A neutral approach would begin with a formulation such as: “Multiple governments, NGOs, and legal bodies have described or rejected the characterization of Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide.”
Respect for Jimmy Wales 📉📉
If you are not able to extrapolate, I’m not going to give an opinion on all ~200 governments in the world, or any significant fraction of them.
Fundamental error. Wales and the wikipedia ethos is not about “not offending” people; it’s about creating a resource that can be trusted by as many people as possible.
Only that there’s apparently enough “serious” ones to be OK to deny genocide in an encyclopedia.
And how you get trust is by denying inconvenient facts that are only controversial to morons and complicit governments and politicians according to you, because they’re “serious” in your stupid, shallow and meaningless criteria. Moron.
I’ve never said Wikipedia should deny the genocide in Gaza and you know it.
You are not a serious commenter; goodbye.
You just defended claiming objections should be taken seriously from “serious” (lmao) countries in the specific context of someone trying to get the article rewritten to downplay claims of genocide by invoking the claims of interested governments that are the ones doing the downplaying for their own cynical reasons.
You’re an idiot who can’t follow the topic and context of conversation. Goodbye.