Jump to content

Draft:Antisemitism on Wikipedia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Part of a series on
Antisemitism
Definitions
Geography
Manifestations
Antisemitic tropes
Antisemitic publications
Persecution
Antisemitism on the Internet
Opposition
Category

Antisemitism on Wikipedia has been examined due to user conduct, possible anti-Jewish bias, and coverage of the Holocaust on English and other language Wikipedias. Starting in the early years of Wikipedia, antisemitic misconduct was observed and penalized. Wikipedia has also been accused of antisemitic bias in its coverage of Israel-related topics. In 2024, the English Wikipedia issued a controversial decision to deem the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a non-governmental organization that works against antisemitism and prejudice, as a "generally unreliable" source on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Antisemitism-related research has examined Wikipedia's treatment of the Holocaust[1] and its policy of neutrality.[2]

Scholars have also used Wikipedia data in sundry ways to research online antisemitism.[3][4] The European Holocaust Research Infrastructure used Wikidata to improve its coverage on Nazi-era ghettos and camps.[5] Richard Utz, a scholar of anti-Jewish medieval narratives, has called for Wikipedia editing to combat residual antisemitic sentiment and contemporary anti-Jewish propaganda.[6]

Antisemitic misconduct

[edit]

In the early years of Wikipedia, there were isolated cases of antisemitic misconduct by Wikipedia contributors, as well as one larger-scale incident.[7] In his book on Wikipedia culture, Joseph Reagle notes, for example, that a Wikipedian was blocked in 2005 for posting a list of purported Jewish editors.[7]

Neo-Nazis discussed their plan to intervene in Jewish topics on Wikipedia, quoted in a Wikipedia-EN list, February 7 2005

In his "Nazis and Norms" chapter, Reagle highlights a broader 2005 episode when neo-Nazis apparently mobilized to preserve an article on "Jewish ethnocentrism," based on the writings of antisemitic professor Kevin MacDonald. According to Reagle, neo-Nazis and other Wikipedians were polite in their discussions, in keeping with Wikipedia etiquette and in keeping with the neo-Nazi guidance to avoid offending Wikipedians with anti-Jewish criticism.[7] Nonetheless, Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales stated that he would set aside ordinary procedures, protect the encyclopedia, and ban users as needed "if 300 neo-Nazis show up and start doing serious damage."[7]

Other misconduct has included antisemitic vandalism on Wikipedia pages[8][9] and the creation of accounts with antisemitic names,[2] the creative nature of which obscures their identification.[10] Wikipedia has responded, for example, banning a user for their anti-Jewish campaign.[2] Antisemitic vandalism on Wikipedia pages typically result in quick reversals by site editors.[8]

Concerns have also been raised about "Jew tagging", a practice primarily driven by one active editor, who would tag biographies of Jewish individuals as such. One subject affected by the tagging suspected antisemitic motives, although the Wikimedia Foundation said that the editing had no malicious intent.[11]

Other anti-Jewish bias

[edit]

Aside from explicit anti-Jewish misconduct on Wikipedia, concerns have been raised about other forms of anti-Jewish bias. In one study, the use of nouns in relation to Jews and Judaism on Wikipedia was found to exhibit a mix of positive and negative associations, though overall they lean slightly positive. Words like "scholar," "culture," and "heritage" often accompany "Jewish," presenting Judaism in contexts of intellectual and cultural contributions. However, certain terms, such as "lobby" and "conspiracy," reveal recurring biases and negative stereotypes that frame Jews as political entities with potentially undue influence. Nevertheless, the study concludes that the word "Islamic" is far more likely to be associated with a negative connotations than the word "Jewish" or "Christian".[12]

The Feb. 2007 removal of an anti-Jewish critique of the NGO War on Want, in Wikipedia, with the new version on the right.

The framing of Wikipedia articles can be biased against Jews, at times, as Wolniewicz-Slomka and Makhortykh found, for instance, when Jewish heroics was omitted or Jewish suffering marginalized.[13][14] In a 2010 article on framing, the authors identified cases of "criticism elimination," such as the revision of accusation that the NGO War on Want employed "Holocaust and anti-Semitic themes."[2] In 2018, journalist Yair Rosenberg argued that "activist" editors were "quietly attempting to erase traces of the [Labour] party's Jewish problem from Wikipedia" by seeking to delete the Antisemitism in the British Labour Party article or add 'allegations' to the title. Rosenberg also objected that, at that time, the Jeremy Corbyn article did not include criticisms of antisemitism. Three months later, such criticisms did have a section in the Wikipedia article.[15]

Wikipedia's editing policy offers the opportunity for the creation of articles or sections with antisemitic bias, an issue that editors resolve through processes of article deletion and editing.[16][17] For example, in 2005, editors removed an anti-Jewish section of the Eugenics article after in-depth Wikipedia talk page conversations with a suspected sock puppet account from Stormfront.[17][better source needed]

The antisemitic views of Father Coughlin, shown on this 1934 magazine cover, were deleted and then restored on Wikipedia.

In other cases, references to the antisemitic views of notable individuals were deleted, such as Father Charles Coughlin and then restored.[18] Due to such disruptions, Wikipedia periodically restricts editing on its otherwise open platform.[18]

According to Chip Berlet of Political Research Associates, Wikipedia also repeatedly overcame efforts to insert an antisemitic conspiracy theory, that Jews were responsible for the September 11 attacks, into various pages.[19]

Antisemitic viewpoints have been observed on Wikipedia's non-English sites. For instance, viewpoints expressed in antisemitic literature will be expressed as a legitimate historical viewpoint.[20] In some instances, pages concerning popular individuals who maintain antisemitic viewpoints will be edited with a respectful tone.[21] Compared to English Wikipedia, the Polish version was found to downplay the real or possible Jewish ethnicity of favored persons of note, such as Pola Negri, arguably reflecting Polish values and concerns.[22] Conversely, the Polish version included the Jewish ancestry of Irena Szewińska, a victim of Communist antisemitism, which the English version did not acknowledge (at the time of the analysis).[22]

[edit]

While Wikipedia is a significant site for Holocaust information, scholars and Jewish community groups have paid close attention to signs of anti-Jewish and other bias in articles about the Holocaust.[1][5][14][13]

Excerpt from a 2013 review that rejects "Good Article" status for The Holocaust article, cited by PFanzelter (2015).

In 2015, Eva Pfanzelter published a qualitative analysis that found "racist, anti-Semitic, revisionist or denialist remarks" in 9 of the top 60 threads about The Holocaust article. For example, some Wikipedians argued that Jews should not be allowed to edit the article and that research sources should be rejected if written by Jews. Another 7 threads alleged bias by other editors.[1] Wikipedia responded by deleting various edits and blocking some editors. Pfanzelter stated that the discussions were "rarely neutral" and that "serious scholars would dismiss" its Good Article peer review, which had argued that the wording, such as murder and genocide, "betrays a bias towards the belief that the Holocaust was a bad thing."[1] Since the article's readership was declining, the author speculated that Neo-Nazi and other extremist activists may have shifted attention from Wikipedia to other social networks, such as Facebook.[1]

Several studies observed anti-Jewish bias in Wikipedia within their broader investigations of "memory wars," in the words of Stefania Manca, whereby ethnic groups compete politically over historical events.[23] In one such case study, Daniel Wolniewicz-Slomka analyzed the framing of Holocaust 2014 articles in the English, Hebrew, and Polish Wikipedias, without explicitly labeling any differences as biased against Jews or Poles. For the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp article, it was found that the Polish version emphasized responsibility of German Nazis, not Poles, and it omits the category of collaborators, e.g., the Kapo. The Hebrew article mentions Jewish and, to a lesser extent, Polish heroics, while the Polish article omits the former. Only the Polish article brings up the problem of Holocaust denial. For the 1941 Jedwabne pogrom, the language versions diverge more. While all three identify Poles as the perpetrators, the Polish article further notes that Poles had strong antisemitic feelings. German incitement is covered more in English Wikipedia. Overall, the author found that the framing was less tied than anticipated to the concurrent dispute between Poles and Israeli Jews over of the Holocaust. Indeed, the Polish Wikipedia was more critical of Poles than the nationalistic sense of Poles as "noble victims."[13]

Relying partly on the Wolniewicz-Slomka methodology, Mykola Makhortykh compared editor interpretations of the Babi Yar massacres in the English, Russian, and Ukrainian Wikipedias. The Russian and Ukrainian articles paid roughly half (48, 41, 82%) as much attention as the English Wikipedia to the atrocities committed. The Russian and Ukrainian versions also emphasized the trauma on (surviving) non-Jews and as an attack on the Ukrainian people overall. The Ukrainian Wikipedia here places less emphasis on Jewish suffering, which Makhortykh says is marginalized in favor of Ukrainian national victimhood.[14] This version also saw, in the Talk pages, effort to deny Ukrainian responsibility. All three Wikipedias has contributors who sought to deny the Holocaust.[14] Overall, the research found that these massacres were presented in Wikipedia to favor a national viewpoint (e.g., blaming Ukrainians in the Russian text) and to disparage the memory of the Holocaust (e.g., by stressing Ukrainian suffering in their language Wikipedia).[14] In a similar analysis of the 1941 Lviv pogroms, Makhortykh found that the Russian Wikipedia, unlike articles in 7 other languages, avoided discussion of anti-Jewish violence partly to marginalize the Holocaust in Russia.[24]

From 2013 to 2021, the Croatian Wikipedia was caught in the spotlight for promoting far-right ideas, including Holocaust revisionism and downplaying the atrocities of the Ustaše regime, such as the killings of Serbs, Roma, anti-fascists, and Jews at the Jasenovac concentration camp.[25] In 2021, Wikipedia published its "Croatian Wikipedia Disinformation Assessment," which described the case and the banning of the editors involved.[26]

In an explicitly critical vein, in 2023 Grabowski and Klein have described Wikipedia editors as intentionally introducing skewed views and distortions in the encyclopedia's history of the Holocaust.[27] In response, the English Wikipedia's Arbitration Committee opened a case to investigate and evaluate the actions of editors in the affected articles.[28] Ultimately, the Committee banned two editors from the topic areas, although Klein criticized the proposed remedies as "[lacking] depth and consequence".[29]

Bias in Israel-related content

[edit]
See also: Wikipedia and the Israeli–Palestinian conflict

In editing about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, according to Oboler[who?] (2010), "not all campaigners" are anti-Jewish when editing with a pro-Palestinian viewpoint.[2]

Various established Jewish community organizations have alleged a potential pattern of anti-Jewish bias on the part of Wikipedia editors that effectively silences what they argue are Jewish communal perspectives on matters relating to the State of Israel.[citation needed] In the wake of the October 7, 2023 terror attack in Israel, the World Jewish Congress alleged in a report that Wikipedia entries in English demonstrate a pattern of anti-Israel bias.[30] [31] leading the keynote speaker, politician Manuel Valls, to speak of an "antisemitic bias" in Wikipedia.[30]

In 2024, the Jerusalem Post reported that an anti-Zionist wikipedia editor had edited the page entitled Zionism, and was suspended for violating wikipedia's rule against reversions on that page. The user's edits were criticised on instagram by an Israeli actor and activist called Roi Dolev, for language related to the framing of Zionism as colonization, as well as the statement that Zionists wanted "as much land, as many Jews, and as few Palestinians as possible".[32] Israeli writer Hen Mazzig called the entry "downright antisemitic", saying that it promoted the Khazar hypothesis of Ashkenazi ancestry.[33]

A 2024 article in the Jewish Journal authored by Aaaron Bander, raised concerns regarding editors removing antisemitism as one of the ideologies of Hamas, supporting this viewpoint through interviews with Israeli academics and wikipedia editors who had participated in the debate.[34] In 2021, the Jerusalem Post reported criticism of wikipedia by right-wing British pro-Israel blogger David Collier, who argued that "Wikipedia today is a central conduit in the spread of antisemitism. The lies, propaganda and distortion are visible on every relevant page." He gave the example of the page on the Campaign Against Antisemitism, which he argued should not have included criticisms levelled against the organization by anti-Zionist Jews, which he contrasted with what he said was a lack of criticism on the page of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign.[35]

Source selection

[edit]

Wikipedia maintains a list of "perennial sources" whose reliability has been evaluated by a community of editors. Possible statuses include "generally reliable", "marginally reliable... depending on context", "generally unreliable", and "deprecated".[36]

Wikipedia policy on the ADL as a reliable source, June 21, 2024

In 2024, there was a controversial Wikipedia decision to deem the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) as "generally unreliable" on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Editors supporting the decision argued that the ADL's credibility was undermined by an overly-broad classification of antisemitic incidents, based on the IHRA definition, as well as statements by ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt.[37] This decision "extend[ed] to 'the intersection of the topics of antisemitism and the Israel/Palestine conflict'"[38]

On antisemitism in general, Wikipedia stated that the ADL "can roughly be taken as reliable on the topic of antisemitism when Israel and Zionism are not concerned."[39]

A number of Jewish groups jointly wrote a letter to the Wikimedia Foundation, asking them to reverse the ADL decision because it "could provide cover for antisemitism"[40] and is "stripping the Jewish community of the right to defend itself from the hatred that targets our community."[39] The Foundation replied that it does not involve itself in such decisions, which are made by a community of volunteer editors.[39] Deborah Lipstadt, the U.S. envoy on antisemitism, also raised concerns about Wikipedia's action on the ADL.[41]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b c d e Pfanzelter, Eva (2015). "At the crossroads with public history: Mediating the Holocaust on the Internet". Holocaust Studies. 21 (4): 250–271. doi:10.1080/17504902.2015.1066066. ...other discussions (9 threads out of 60) are more easily identifiable as racist, anti-Semitic, revisionist or denialist remarks: Editors openly try to change the text of the lemma [article title], for example, by including a "Holocaust controversy" section or paragraphs about an alleged "Jewish striving to establish world dominion" prior to Adolf Hitler's rise to power, and by questioning the accuracy of the number of Jewish victims. Others try to argue that Jews should not be allowed to contribute to the writing of the lemma, they delete references to scholars because they seemingly have identified them as being biased due to their Jewish background, and some openly deny the Holocaust.
  2. ^ a b c d e Oboler, Andre; Steinberg, Gerald; Stern, Rephael (11 October 2010). "The Framing of Political NGOs in Wikipedia through Criticism Elimination". Journal of Information Technology & Politics. 7 (4): 284–299. doi:10.1080/19331680903577822.Closed access icon
  3. ^ Mustafa, Raza Ul; Japkowicz, Nathalie (2024). "Monitoring the evolution of antisemitic discourse on extremist social media using BERT". Arxiv. arXiv:2403.05548.
  4. ^ Zannettou, Savvas; Finkelstein, Joel; Bradlyn, Barry; Blackburn, Jeremy (26 May 2020). "A Quantitative Approach to Understanding Online Antisemitism". Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media. 14: 786–797. arXiv:1809.01644. doi:10.1609/icwsm.v14i1.7343. ISSN 2334-0770. Archived from the original on 12 June 2024. Retrieved 1 November 2024.
  5. ^ a b Cooey, N. (2019). "Leveraging Wikidata to Enhance Authority Records in the EHRI Portal". Journal of Library Metadata. 19 (1–2): 83–98. doi:10.1080/19386389.2019.1589700.
  6. ^ Utz, R. (2019). Medievalism, Antisemitism, and Twenty-First-Century Media: An Update. Studies in Medievalism XXVIII: Medievalism and Discrimination, 41-50.
  7. ^ a b c d Reagle, Joseph M. (2012). Good faith collaboration: the culture of Wikipedia. History and Foundations of Information Science. Cambridge, Mass. London: MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-01447-2.
  8. ^ a b Fox, Mira (16 August 2021). "Wikipedia fixed its swastika problem fast. Why can't anyone else?". The Forward. Archived from the original on 13 March 2024. Retrieved 27 October 2024.
  9. ^ Dean, Grace; Akhtar, Allana. "Pictures of Swastikas temporarily replaced Wikipedia pages for Jennifer Lopez, Ben Affleck". Business Insider.
  10. ^ Aksit, F. G. An Empirical Research:“Wikipedia Vandalism Detection using VandalSense 2.0”.
  11. ^ Kosner, Edward (17 April 2020). "Jew-Tagging @Wikipedia". Commentary.
  12. ^ Mohamed, E. (2016). Jewish, christian and islamic in the english wikipedia. Online-Heidelberg Journal of Religions on the Internet, 11. "These two issues aside, I have found that in Wikipedia Islamic is probably more negative than either Christian or Jewish..."
  13. ^ a b c Wolniewicz-Slomka, Daniel (22 December 2016). "Framing the Holocaust in popular knowledge: 3 articles about the Holocaust in English, Hebrew and Polish Wikipedia". Adeptus (8): 29–49. doi:10.11649/a.2016.012.
  14. ^ a b c d e Makhortykh, Mykola (2017). "Framing the Holocaust Online: Memory of the Babi Yar Massacres on Wikipedia". Studies in Russian, Eurasian and Central European New Media. 18: 67–94. ISSN 2043-7633. Archived from the original on 27 September 2024. Retrieved 29 October 2024. The subject of Holocaust denial was a prominent part of the discussions in all three versions, where calls often appeared to remove 'Bolshevik lies' ('Obsuzhdenie: Babii Iar' 2017) or to add arguments effectively denying the Holocaust to the article.
  15. ^ Rosenberg, Yair (10 January 2018). "How Some Wikipedia Editors Tried—and Failed—To Erase The UK Labour Party's Anti-Semitism Problem". Tablet. Archived from the original on 23 April 2024. Retrieved 26 October 2024.
  16. ^ Tripodi, Francesca (27 June 2021). "Ms. Categorized: Gender, notability, and inequality on Wikipedia". New Media & Society. 25 (7): 1687–1707. doi:10.1177/14614448211023772.Open access icon
  17. ^ a b De Vera, Emma (2020). Classifying Eugenics: A "Wandering Subject" moves to Wikipedia (Master's Thesis). University of Michigan School of Information. The suspected sock account, under the username Harkenbane, added a section called "Jewish eugenics" and removed a separate section with the justification, "This section perpetuated the myth that eugenics and Nazi Germany are strongly linked, and has been edited for historical accuracy."[78] Another editor, Fastfission, was alarmed by these unsolicited or discussed revisions and reverted them immediately, noting that all claims made in the article about Nazi Germany are backed with citations to credible sources. Fastfission wrote wrote, "[I] suspect very much the motivations of this user; the entire edit smacks a very nasty sort of revisionism and denial."[79] A third editor, SlimVirgin, agreed and speculated that Harkenbane may have been a sock puppet account from a fringe website. This prompted Harkenbane to respond, who dismissed all of their accusations and instead doubled down on their claim that Nazi Germany and eugenics was not connection, calling it an "urban legend."[80]
  18. ^ a b Rosenzweig, Roy (2006). "Can history be open source? Wikipedia and the future of the past". The Journal of American History. 93 (1): 117–146. doi:10.2307/4486062. JSTOR 4486062. Archived from the original on 7 October 2024. Retrieved 3 November 2024. The Wikipedian collectivity must temporarily "lock" controversial entries because of vandalism and "edit wars" in which articles are changed and immediately changed back, such as an effort by NYCExpat to remove any references to Father Charles Coughlin's anti-Semitism. But other entries—even ones in which dedicated partisans such as the followers of Lyndon LaRouche battle for their point of view—remain open for anyone to edit and still present a reasonably accurate account.
  19. ^ Greenberg, Richard (4 September 2006). "The lie that just won't seem to die: Jews behind 9/11". Jerusalem Post. Archived from the original on 24 April 2024. Retrieved 5 November 2024. Efforts to connect the Jews with 9/11, however, are not limited to fringe groups talking with one another. Contributors to Wikipedia, the popular and influential online encyclopedia, have tried repeatedly to insert anti-Jewish 9/11 theories into Wikipedia's pages and represent them as fact or at least plausible versions of reality, according to [Chip] Berlet [of Political Research Associates]. The insertions - which represent one of countless pieces of potentially suspect information submitted to Wikipedia almost daily - have been promptly excised by the encyclopedia's volunteer editors, says Berlet, himself a Wikipedia editor, "but it requires constant attention."
  20. ^ Matussek, C. (2013). Fertile Ground for a Poisonous Weed: The Protocols of the Elders of Zion in the Arab World. Israel Journal of Foreign Affairs, 7(3), 71-78.
  21. ^ Graff, A. (2022). Jewish perversion as strategy of domination: the anti-semitic subtext of anti-gender discourse. Journal of Modern European History, 20(3), 423-439.
  22. ^ a b Callahan, E. S., & Herring, S. C. (2011). Cultural bias in Wikipedia content on famous persons. Journal of the American society for information science and technology, 62(10), 1899-1915.
  23. ^ Manca, Stefania (27 May 2021). "Bridging cultural studies and learning science: An investigation of social media use for Holocaust memory and education in the digital age". Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies. 43 (3): 226–253. doi:10.1080/10714413.2020.1862582. ISSN 1071-4413.
  24. ^ Makhortykh, Mykola (1 September 2017). "War Memories and Online Encyclopedias". Journal of Educational Media, Memory, and Society. 9 (2): 40–68. doi:10.3167/jemms.2017.090203. ISSN 2041-6938.
  25. ^ * "These Far-right Nationalists Didn't Like What They Read Online About World War II – So They Rewrote History". Haaretz. 4 August 2021. Archived from the original on 23 September 2023. Retrieved 17 October 2024. A recent probe by the online encyclopedia Wikipedia reveals major historical revisionism by far-right forces in its Croatian and Serbian versions. But it also exposes the dangerous overlap between nationalism and disinformation online.
  26. ^ "Croatian Wikipedia Disinformation Assessment-2021 – Meta". Meta Wikimedia. Archived from the original on 14 March 2022. Retrieved 14 June 2021. Between 2013 and 2019, the content on Croatian Wikipedia became the subject of media scrutiny. In 2021, a community global ban with subsequent revocation of administrator privileges for the group leaders created an opportunity for new admins to join the project and help uphold and defend the five pillars.
  27. ^ Jan, Grabowski; Shira, Klein (2023). "Wikipedia's Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust". The Journal of Holocaust Research. 37 (2): 133–190. doi:10.1080/25785648.2023.2168939.
  28. ^ Elia-Shalev, Asaf (1 March 2023). "Wikipedia's 'Supreme Court' tackles alleged conspiracy to distort articles on Holocaust". The Jerusalem Post. Archived from the original on 10 March 2023. Retrieved 11 March 2023.
  29. ^ Metzger, Cerise Valenzuela (16 May 2023). "Ruling on Wikipedia's Distortion of Holocaust History Lacks Depth". Chapman University. Archived from the original on 27 May 2023. Retrieved 25 September 2023.
  30. ^ a b "Wikipedia entries show anti-Israel bias says WJC". World Jewish Congress. 19 March 2024. Archived from the original on 5 October 2024. Retrieved 1 October 2024.
  31. ^ Aharoni Lir, Shlomit (2024). "The Bias Against Israel on Wikipedia" (PDF). World Jewish Congress. Retrieved 10 November 2024.
  32. ^ Heller, Mathilda. "Wikipedia's page on Zionism is partly edited by an anti-Zionist - investigation". The Jerusalem Post.
  33. ^ Cordi, Peter. "Wikipedia blasted for 'wildly inaccurate' change to entry on Zionism: 'Downright antisemitic'". Washington Examiner. Archived from the original on 7 October 2024. Retrieved 1 November 2024.
  34. ^ Bandler, Aaron (23 May 2024). "Seven Tactics Wikipedia Editors Used to Spread Anti-Israel Bias Since Oct. 7". Jewish Journal. Archived from the original on 19 September 2024. Retrieved 27 October 2024.
  35. ^ Gal, Hannah (10 June 2021). "A spike in antisemitism has British Jewry worrying for the future". The Jerusalem Post.
  36. ^ Bandler, Aaron (11 September 2024). "Wikipedia's Fundamental Sourcing Problem". Jewish Journal.
  37. ^ Elia-Shalev, Asaf. "Wikipedia moves to bar ADL, claiming reliability concerns on Israel and antisemitim". Times of Israel. Archived from the original on 19 June 2024. Retrieved 1 November 2024.
  38. ^ Collins, Michael (21 June 2024). "Wikipedia ADL Israel Palestinian conflict and antisemitism". USA Today. Archived from the original on 22 June 2024. Retrieved 6 October 2024.
  39. ^ a b c "Wikipedia rebuffs Jewish groups' call to override editors' move against ADL". Times of Israel. JTA. 26 June 2024. Archived from the original on 14 September 2024. Retrieved 1 November 2024.
  40. ^ Bandler, Aaron (25 June 2024). "Forty-three Jewish Orgs Call on Wikimedia to Reconsider Editors' Decision on ADL". Jewish Journal. Archived from the original on 8 November 2024. Retrieved 27 October 2024.
  41. ^ Rod, Marc (8 August 2024). "Lipstadt 'deeply disturbed' by Wikipedia's ban on the ADL". Jewish Insider. Regarding the ADL and Wikipedia, she said she was reluctant to comment on any individual organization but she was "deeply disturbed that Wikipedia should decide that one of the main organizations that tracks and evaluates antisemitism should be totally disbarred from commenting on certain things." "It struck me as very strange and it struck me as not as thoughtful, as judicious as it should be."
[edit]


Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Draft:Antisemitism_on_Wikipedia&oldid=1264102005"