Will the Arabic Wikipedia continue to attribute the Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital explosion to Israel until end of year?
resolved Jan 1

At time of writing, a Google Chrome translation of the Arabic language Wikipedia page on the Al-Ahli Baptist Hospital explosion, the title of which translates to the Baptist Hospital massacre, looks like this:

The page clearly attributes the explosion to Israel.

Until end of year, will that page, or a renamed page about the explosion (whichever page appears to be the main article for the explosion on the Arabic wikipedia), continue to attribute the explosion to Israel?

Resolves "No" as soon as the article reasonably unambiguously states the attack was not due to Israel, and I am satisfied this is not vandalism or part of an edit war.

Otherwise, at end of year, resolves "Yes" if the article still attributes the explosion to Israel, or "Ambiguous" if it does not reasonably unambiguously say either way whether Israel was responsible.

I won't bet on this market.

I'll have to use automatic translation to figure out what the article is saying, but am happy to accept assistance if anyone thinks this is unreliable.

Get Ṁ1,000 play money

🏅 Top traders

#NameTotal profit
Sort by:
bought Ṁ15 of No NO

Without deference to Israeli PRopaganda there’s no reason to acknowledge the conspiracy Gish Gallop.

"Real catastrophe"? "Pool of blood"? Either the translation is messed up, or someone forgot to enforce WP:EMPHATIC...

bought Ṁ5 of No YES

Non-Arabic speakers are coming to the article discussion:

@ לוינס what do you mean by "the Arabic language isn't a language"?? -- Karim Naqash 15:13, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

It seems that the translation did not work well. I meant that I do not speak Arabic. News ( talk ) 06:19, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

I like this concept a lot. I made a similar market for the death toll question:

It's intended to be the mirror of my original death toll question:

@EvanDaniel honestly I just find this market depressing. how can there be mutual understanding when even the base facts are in contention?


bought Ṁ50 of Yes YES


What does the ar.wiki article on Israel look like? That should be a good benchmark of how biased it is over longer periods of time. I'll have to take a look at that at some point.

bought Ṁ0 of Yes YES
bought Ṁ1 of Ambiguous YES

End of the year? Surely someone will have edited it by then...

@Joshua It's so blatant now that I thought I should give it some extra time, to give No a chance

More related questions