Providing an up to date, high quality article on an ongoing genocide that reports the best known information from a variety of sources while maintaining credibility with neutrality seems like the best Wikipedia can do not just now but for other future conflicts.
You’re correct, but we’re discussing the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict, not a genocide. While it may feel good to use evocative words to spark emotion in others, you’re going to have to cite sources and provide an argument if you want us to earnestly consider your point of view.
The ICJ is also anything but neutral. The UN General Assembly elects the judges. The UN general assembly that has 164 resolutions against Israel, and ...
Names aside an organisation whatever you want, but this organisation is anything but neutral. If Israel does not get fair treatment from the people assigning the judges here. And while Israel will go there, they will not accept the judgement of the court (which is the right of any country). And ... the complaint submitted by South Africa is full of factual inaccuracies and, frankly, reads like a rant. Read for yourself here:
It is a total rant, for example, it directly accuses the U.S. of genocidal acts in Gaza for "failing to use it's influence". It contains outright lies about statements made by officials.
