Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:17, 26 April 2012

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Holocaust denial article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22Auto-archiving period: 30 days

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting.

view · edit Frequently asked questions Important: In order to save editors from repeatedly answering questions which have already been asked, as well saving you the time from asking them, it is strongly recommended that you view the following FAQ section, which contains responses that represent editorial consensus on the following issues which have frequently arisen on the Holocaust denial talk page. In addition, the links given to related archived discussions are not necessarily exhaustive, and it is recommended that you use the search tool as well. To view an item, click the link to the right of the question. 1: Holocaust denial is not necessarily antisemitic. Response: One item that has been raised here several times is the contention that Holocaust denial is not inherently antisemitic, and/or that Misplaced Pages should not conclude that everyone who is a Holocaust denier harbors antisemitic feelings. Misplaced Pages is not here to conclude that, and its editors' opinion on the matter - whatever those opinions are and regardless of who they belong to - are irrelevant. Misplaced Pages is here to present what reliable sources say. In this case, there is a preponderance of reliable material stating that Holocaust denial is antisemitic, and therefore the article notes that Holocaust denial is considered to be antisemitic, and why the antisemitism template is legitimately included. Related archived discussion: , . 2: The antisemitism template should be removed. Response: Please see the response to Item 1 as to why the antisemitism template is legitimately placed. 3: Holocaust denial should be renamed Holocaust revisionism Response: No. Per numerous reliable sources, the correct terminology is Holocaust denial/denier. Related archived discussion: , , , , , . 4: Not all historians reject Holocaust denial. Response: Yes, they do. As is already stated in the article, according to the oldest and largest American association of historians and history teachers, "no serious historian questions that the Holocaust took place", and that Holocaust denial is a form of "academic fraud". Misplaced Pages must avoid using vague or unspecific terms, and words which do not accuractely reflect what reliable sources say. Related archived discussion: , . 5: The 4 million Auschwitz plaque Response: One issue relates to the death toll plaque at Auschwitz, which was amended following the collapse of the Soviet Union to read 1.5 million Jewish deaths, instead of 4 million victims of no specified ethnicity or background. The Soviet authorities estimated the death toll not via historical methodology, but by working out how many people could have been cremated during the entire existence of the camp, taking 20% off to account for crematoria down-time, and using that number: around 4 million. They did not, for example, examine how many people were sent to the camp versus how many did not return, but used the 4 million variant to purposely overstate non-Jewish deaths, and diminish the fact that 90% of those that disappeared following their deportation to Auschwitz were Jewish. Once the Iron Curtain fell, communist pressure to keep the original Soviet estimate ceased and the more accurate estimate replaced it. In any event, reputable historians did not use the 4 million figure in their calculations of the overall number of Jews killed in the Holocaust. Rather, they used numbers of 1 to 1.5 million, figures which are still used today. Related archived discussion/items: , , and the appropriate section in the Auschwitz article.

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Template:Pbneutral

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Holocaust denial. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Holocaust denial at the Reference desk.

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Jewish history Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Alternative views Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Skepticism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Germany Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. European history Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

	Holocaust denial has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result June 6, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted October 11, 2004 Featured article candidate Not promoted December 27, 2006 Good article nominee Listed July 5, 2007 Good article reassessment Kept July 15, 2008 Good article reassessment Kept Current status: Good article

Template:Maintained

Bias

This article is completley biased against holocaust deniers. The claims are apparently examined, but all I can see is a basic introduction. It doesn't even state any of the key evidence which supports the claims, such as it's impossible to cremate over 2000 people in one day using 5 ovens with 15 muffles, which apparently happened in Auschwitz-Birkenau crematoria 2. The article gladly displays uncited 'evidence' in support of the holocaust. This article should contain both sides of the story, not uncited evidence about the holocaust and a bunch of name-calling against deniers. 2.25.254.114 (talk) 14:23, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

In much the same way the Misplaced Pages entry on the planet eath is totally and unreasonably biased against flat-earthers. Oh and yes, it most certainly is possible, as has been proven time and time again by peiople who actually know what they are talking about. Consult the nizkor project for more details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.41.140.2 (talk) 15:09, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Just thought I'd mention—we have an article on Nizkor Project. Bus stop (talk) 15:18, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Neutrality does not mean giving equal side to all sides of a dispute. You need reliable sources for claims. I shall work on including more citations for the article itself. Furthermore, please see Misplaced Pages policies on:

• WP:UNDUE - Undue weight
• WP:FRINGE - Fringe theories
• WP:RELIABLE - Reliable Sources

--Harizotoh9 (talk) 14:44, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Also, the article that deals in more depth with the claims is here:

• Criticism of Holocaust denial

--Harizotoh9 (talk) 14:46, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Holocaust deniers don't come out with wild uncited claims. All you have to do is some basic maths and logic, and even a chimpanzee would see sense in what we are saying. I feel compelled to write a new section entitled "Examination of the claims", with actual detail about the claims, and not implications of bigotry toward holocaust deniers. 2.25.234.199 (talk) 15:43, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Make sure it's cited to reliable sources. --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 16:13, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

A wise person once summed up Misplaced Pages philosophy as: "Your opinion, and mine, are unimportant. What is important is sourcing."

Misplaced Pages operates by using reliable sources and not our personal opinions. You will need a reliable source attesting to your claims before they can be added to the article. Also, Neutrality does not mean giving undue weight to scientifically incorrect or minority positions. Do not insert original research WP:NOR. Any information that you include that does not follow WP policies may very well be removed. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 16:22, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I came to this article because of the National Socialist Movement presence in Florida in response to the Trayvon Martin killing. The NSM website had a .pdf file for FAQs, one of which discussed Holocaust denial. And so I came here looking for facts. This topic would benefit greatly from the inclusion of claims and the evidence refuting those claims. Such an inclusion should be completely uncontroversial. TreacherousWays (talk) 18:59, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Criticism of Holocaust denial is the main article examining their claims. More could be ported over to the main article. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 19:07, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Inconsistency

This article says Canada bans Holocaust denial, but laws against Holocaust denial does not. That article says Bosnia and Herzegovina bans it, but this one does not. From what I can tell, Bosnia has merely proposed a ban but not adopted one, while Canada actually has a ban. - Biruitorul 21:44, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

scope of the word "holocaust"

Should all groups the Nazis systematically murdered be included under the heading "the holocaust"? I see that someone has tried adding other groups to the first sentence of the article but the edit was undone. Any thoughts?Mfhiller (talk) 06:39, 24 April 2012 (UTC)mfhiller

check out the wikipedia page the holocaust, it states that the definition can include other groups, therefore they should be included here.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 07:08, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

This article is about Holocaust denial, which specifically denies the genocide of Jews. Holocaust deniers don't really care about denying the genocide of other groups. Please review the archives of this article, where this is discussed extensively, and the sources themselves. Jayjg 11:10, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

This article starts with the following sentence. 'Holocaust denial is the act of denying the genocide of Jews during World War II, usually referred to as the Holocaust'. The Holocaust is also used, within wikipedia, to refer to the genocide of other groups. Therefore it is entirely approriate that the first reference to the Holocaust refer to those other groups. You can change this be something like. The Holocaust is ..........etc, etc. Holocaust denial is usually the act of denying the genocide of Jews during World War II. Do you see the difference? However note that anyone who states that the gas chambers at Auschwitz-Berkinau were actually air raid shelters (as an example of a claim that is made) is denying that Roma and Sinti people were gassed there. That specific claim, as an example, does not refer to Jewish victims alone. The rest of the article should, as it does, refer to the specific claims made by Holocaust deniers, and most of these will refer to Jewish victims. However general denialist claims, such as this example, are just that, general examples that apply to all Nazi Holocaust victims. Neither do the laws against Holocaust denial not differentiate on the basis of the victims. They generally refer to acts of genocide. Again, this should be reflected in this article, by making it clear that Nazi racial and social policy had several targets. Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 16:12, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

If you can find some reliable sources describing holocaust denial as having anything to do with the Roma and the Sinti, it's usable. But: many of us here have been students of holocaust denial for decades, and have never encountered any instances of Holocaust deniers having any interest in any Holocaust victims other than the Jews. Certainly, Nazi racial and social policy had several targets; holocaust denial, however, is specifically a form of Jew-hatred and is only concerned with Jews. --jpgordon 21:10, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

you have not grasped the reason for the change that I put in. The change reflected the fact that the Nazi Holocaust was directed at several groups, as other wikipedia articles state. My change referrered to that fact, not to any claim about Holocaust denial. This section is headed scope of the word holocaust. It is not titled scope of the words Holocuast denial.Dalai lama ding dong (talk)

suggestion for intro. Scholars differ in either describing the Nazi Holocaust as referring to the deaths of between five and six million Jews, or maintaining that the definition should also include the Nazis' genocide of millions of people in other groups, including Romani, Soviet prisoners of war, Polish and Soviet civilians, homosexuals, people with disabilities, Jehovah's Witnesses and other political and religious opponents, which occurred regardless of whether they were of German or non-German ethnic origin. Using this broader definition, the total number of Holocaust victims is between 11 million and 17 million people. Holocaust denial is usually used to refer to the act of denying the genocide of Jews only during World War II.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 21:43, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

People are capable of following the link to holocaust to get that information; that's the whole point of links. "Holocaust denial" is always used to refer to the act of denying the genocide of Jews only during World War II. What you're wanting to add is quite relevant to the Holocaust in general, but not at all relevant to the subject of Holocaust denial. --jpgordon 22:26, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, Dalai. While I sympathize with your position—I find it abhorrent that the genocide of the Roma is typically ignored in accounts of the Holocaust—Jpgordon is right: Holocaust denial has nothing to do with the Roma. It originates in antisemitism, and AFAIK has nothing to do with antiziganism. — kwami (talk) 22:52, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Exactly so. DLDD, this article is about Holocaust denial, not the Holocaust. Jayjg 23:00, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I'll just leave this here... WilliamH (talk) 23:22, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

at least someone has understood, though most have missed the point. The description of the holocaust as only applying to Jews is only one definition. Both must be included. There is no reason why the intro should not refer to both. Why not just say Holocaust denial is the act of denying the genocide of Jews during World War II, which occurred during the Holocaust. That is a NPOV wording. Other articles on the holocaust refer to all victims. Articles on holocaust denial should use this NPOV wording as well, when referring to the holocaust. Otherwise there is incosistency. No one should have to follow a link to see that there is more than one definition, when it is so simple to include both.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 06:47, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

It's not that there's more than one def, it's that people focus on different aspects. The genocide of Jews is WWII was the Holocaust. The Holocaust was more than that (though that was most of it), but when speaking of the genocide of the Jews, we use the word "Holocaust". You're proposing a convoluted phrases that almost no-one will understand to mean what you're trying to convey. I think what we have now is fine. — kwami (talk) 07:11, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Kwam. Please read the intro to wikipedia page holocaust, which shows your view to be POV. 'Some scholars maintain that the definition of the Holocaust should also include the Nazis' genocide of millions of people in other groups, including Romani, Soviet prisoners of war, Polish and Soviet civilians, homosexuals, people with disabilities, Jehovah's Witnesses and other political and religious opponents, which occurred regardless of whether they were of German or non-German ethnic origin. Using this definition, the total number of Holocaust victims is between 11 million and 17 million people.'. There clearly is more than definition of what the holocaust is, according to wikipedia. All I am asking for is consistency, and NPOV.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 07:35, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

OK maybe we all (mostly) agree that holocaust denial originates in antisemitism and that since this article is about holocaust denial it should speak about the genocide of Jews. However, consistent use of the word "holocaust" is important and there is no reason why the first sentence(s) can't situate a definition of holocaust denial in terms of the genocide of Jews in relation to the broader definition of the holocaust. Also I don't think it is irrelevant to be clear up front to identify the Nazis. By the way some holocaust deniers speak you'd think that it was the Russians who were really responsible. Mfhiller (talk) 07:33, 25 April 2012 (UTC)mfhiller

mfhiller, I agree with you, as the requested changeas are so small, and do not detract from the article, they add to it.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 07:37, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Any more comments before this is taken to a higher level for a ruling?Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 12:21, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Claims that gas chambers were not used.

The claim made by deniers is that either the gas chambers did not exist, or that their design was such that they could not have proceeded the numbers claimed to have been killed. It is OR to state that this claim only refers to the gassing of one group of victims. Roma and Sinti were gassed as well. Therefore the claim that the Nazis did not use gas chambers denies the deaths of all those known to have been gassed. There are references which include the Roma and Sinti as victims of gassing, and I can provide them, but they are not required to justify the change I have made. The denial of gas chambers is a denial applying to,all victims.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 21:34, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

see http://en.wikipedia.org/Criticism_of_Holocaust_denial#Use_of_gas_chambers ' There have been claims by Holocaust deniers that the gas chambers which mainstream historians believe were for the massacre of civilians never existed, but rather that the structures identified as gas chambers actually served other purposes. These other purposes include delousing and disinfection. A similar argument is sometimes used that claims gas was not used to murder Jews and other victims, and that many gas chambers were also built after the war just for show.'. Therefore the ref I added to other victims of gassing already exists in that article. Therefore it should be in this article as well.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 21:58, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

The sources used to support the description of the main claims of Holocaust deniers mention only Jews. None of the sources mention "Roma or Sinti". Please respect WP:V. Jayjg 22:59, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Jayjg is correct. In addition, please review WP:SYNTHESIS. WilliamH (talk) 23:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

the point is that many of the sources refer to the denial of gassing, and the victims of gassing. Here are two refs from the article. "In part III we directly address the three major foundations upon which Holocaust denial rests, including... the claim that gas chambers and crematoria were used not for mass extermination but rather for delousing clothing and disposing of people who died of disease and overwork;  Scientific evidence proves that gas chambers could not have been used to kill large numbers of people. It is WP:SYNTHESIS to say that these quotes only refer to the gassing of Jews. The inclusion of Roma and Sinti is justified by these two quotes alone.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 07:03, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

  http://www.nizkor.org/features/techniques-of-denial/denial-of-science.html.     Writer: Mike Stein In recent years, Holocaust deniers have turned to "scientific" arguments to "prove" that the Nazi regime could not have used gas chambers to carry out an extermination program against Jews and Gypsies. This can be added in, if someone needs a quote that refers to non Jewish victims of gassing. Also another link to Holocaust denial and the Roma http://platosbeard.org/archives/474 17:40, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

And another one http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/holocaust_denial.html Here is the quote

'This article is about the history, development, and methods of Holocaust denial. Holocaust revisionism as it is referred to by its supporters or Holocaust denial as referred by its opposes, is the belief that the Holocaust did not occur as it is described by mainstream historiography. Key elements of this belief are the explicit or implicit rejection that, in the Holocaust: The Nazi government had a policy of deliberately targeting the Jews and the Gypsies for extermination as a people;

And an academic rebuttal to Holocaust denial, that includes 'Gypsies, and political radicals' http://www.adl.org/holocaust/academic.asp Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 18:10, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Punishment for denial of the holocaust referring to Roma. http://www.budapestreport.com/2010/03/11/hungary-impose-3-yr-prison-holocaust-denial/ Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 18:15, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Anti holocaust denial organisation that includes Roma, Vision Yahad – in Unum has three aims : To restore dignity to thousands of Jews and Roma who were murdered and trown into mass graves; to fight against Holocaust denial; http://www.matanel.org/content/yahad-unum

You need to be more selective. For example, this one doesn't show Holocaust deniers denying the genocide of "Gypsies"; rather, the refutation of the deniers asserts that genocide. This one is actually citing an older version of Misplaced Pages's Criticism of Holocaust denial, so we can't use that. This one is just someone's blog, can't use that. If you really want to convince us, you'll need to find something showing or pointing to an example of Holocaust deniers caring a bean about Romani and Sinti, as opposed to an opponent of Holocaust denial defining the Holocaust as including those people as part of a description of the Holocaust. I'd really like to find such sources; I haven't seen anything new regarding this pathology in ages. --jpgordon 18:28, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Jp you need to read ths article again. The references in this article are to those who refute holocaust deniers stating what the holocaust is. What is the difference between this. In recent years, Holocaust deniers have turned to "scientific" arguments to "prove" that the Nazi regime could not have used gas chambers to carry out an extermination program against Jews and Gypsies. And this. Second, and perhaps most prominently, they contend that there were no homicidal gas chambers, particularly at Auschwitz-Birkenau, where mainstream historians believe over 1 million Jews were murdered, primarily in gas chambers. There is no difference. One is from Nizkor, and one from The Holocaust History Project. You need to show that Nizkor is not a reliable source in order to persuade us not to use it. I suggest that you review WP:SOURCES when you ask for Refs to holocaust deniers caring about Sintim or Roma, you apparr to be asking for Primary sources, which is not what we do. I have provided verifiable, reputable third-party sources, and that is all that is required. Therefore the edit should be made.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 19:59, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

ref to negationism of the Romanian govt against Jews and Romani (sic) http://vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres6/distorroumeng.pdf Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 20:17, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Whatever. I think I'll let someone else deal with this; you're not hearing. --jpgordon 20:23, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=q2CtmOFt1NoC&pg=PA187&dq=Negationism+gypsies&hl=en&sa=X&ei=pF2YT4yIM4Wj8gPk4-HpBQ&ved=0CCQQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=Negationism%20gypsies&f=false. Negationism By Faurisson referrered to Gypsies as well. Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 20:36, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Jp. I think that the fact that you have not answered my points, and have only dealt with some of the refs I have provided shows who is not listening. Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 20:39, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Jp. This is classic SYNTH unless you can provide sources showing deniers denying the genocide of specific groups other than Jews. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 20:43, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I have done exactly that, and i have shown that the refs above match those presently used in the article to show that holocaust deniers deny that Jews were gassed. You need to explain the difference between these two refs. In recent years, Holocaust deniers have turned to "scientific" arguments to "prove" that the Nazi regime could not have used gas chambers to carry out an extermination program against Jews and Gypsies. And this. Second, and perhaps most prominently, they contend that there were no homicidal gas chambers, particularly at Auschwitz-Birkenau, where mainstream historians believe over 1 million Jews were murdered, primarily in gas chambers. Please explain why one is an RS and one is not. Until then this is POV and OR as to what you believe the motives of deniers are. We go by sources, not interpretation. I have provided those sources.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 21:08, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

The sources in this article do not refer to Holocaust denial as being denial of the genocide of Roma and Sinti, and you've used material from (and linked to) the Holocaust denial website Association des anciens amateurs de récits de guerre et d'holocauste. What next? Jayjg 23:47, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I take it you mean the sources in this section, not the article. You have failed to answer my question above. Was this a deliberate oversight? I repeat my original argument, the denial of the gas chambers is a denial that anyone was gassed there. That is a denial of all those known to have been gassed. That is all I have to show. You are inventing your own criteria. The article should state that holocaust deniers deny that the gas chambers at Auschwitz birkenau were there. Google no holes, no holocaust. Therefore that should be included in the holocaust denial article. I am not insisting on any more than that. Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 06:48, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

The quickest thing to do is probably for me to enter a new section as Other Claims of Holocaust deniers. The material I have listed here which shows that Hd's deny that any 'human beings' (a phrase used by Irving) died in gas chambers can be added there, along with other claims.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 12:19, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

The "holocaust" refers to the 'the mass murder of Jews under the German Nazi regime', and this article details its denial. I do not understand your reasons for including unrelated claims.
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 16:03, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Ak I recommend that you read wikipedia The Holocaust where you will find this. Some scholars maintain that the definition of the Holocaust should also include the Nazis' genocide of millions of people in other groups, including Romani, Soviet prisoners of war, Polish and Soviet civilians, homosexuals, people with disabilities, Jehovah's Witnesses and other political and religious opponents, which occurred regardless of whether they were of German or non-German ethnic origin. Using this definition, the total number of Holocaust victims is between 11 million and 17 million people. If you maintiain that Holocaust denial s only about the murder of Jews by the Nazis, and nothing else, then we will have to remove the following sections which do not meet your definition. Focus on Allied war crimes in Holocaust denial literature. Other genocide denials. And we have to remove much of Laws against Holocaust denial, as it deals with laws about denying genocide, and not only laws against Holocaust denial. Best regards. Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 17:27, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

You are correct that "the holocaust" is open to a wider interpretation that what I originally posited. However, you must focus on its meaning in the context of "holocaust denial", and this expression has a much narrower ambit. It is original research to claim that all definitions of "the holocaust" will also apply to "holocaust denial".
Best Wishes Ankh.Morpork 18:42, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Ak, Please show me where I claiming that all definitions of the Nazi holocaust apply to Holocaust denial? I certainly do not intend to claim that. What I am stating is that Holocaust deniers make claims that apply to non Jewish victims, as well as Jewish victims. An example is the claim that there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau, or that if there were then they were only used for de lousing. That claim applies to the deaths of all those who we know were gassed there. Therefore these claims should also be referred to in this article. There is plenty of other material here that does not focus on Jewish victims, but focus on other claims of the deniers, (e.g. the bombing of Dresden) therefore all the key claims of the deniers should be referred to in this article. If we can find space for the claim that "more women died on the back seat of Edward Kennedy's car at Chappaquiddick than ever died in a gas chamber in Auschwitz." then we can find space to name all the groups that those women came from.Dalai lama ding dong (talk) 19:17, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages controversial topics
• All unassessed articles
• GA-Class Jewish history-related articles
• Top-importance Jewish history-related articles
• WikiProject Jewish history articles
• GA-Class Alternative views articles
• Mid-importance Alternative views articles
• WikiProject Alternative views articles
• GA-Class Skepticism articles
• Mid-importance Skepticism articles
• WikiProject Skepticism articles
• GA-Class Germany articles
• Mid-importance Germany articles
• WikiProject Germany articles
• GA-Class European history articles
• Mid-importance European history articles
• All WikiProject European history pages
• Misplaced Pages good articles
• Social sciences and society good articles