Revision as of 20:45, 9 September 2007 editStephan Schulz (talk | contribs)Administrators26,888 edits →Sources defining the Holocaust: new section← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 02:26, 16 December 2024 edit undoJohnuniq (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators86,555 editsm Reverted edit by 68.68.90.40 (talk) to last version by YbsoneTag: Rollback |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{Skip to bottom}} |
|
{{ArticleHistory |
|
|
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
|
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|topic=b}} |
|
|
{{tmbox |
|
|
|image=] |
|
|
|text=<big>'''WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES'''</big>{{pb}} |
|
|
] (9 May 2021):{{pb}} |
|
|
The Arbitration Committee advises that administrators may impose "reliable-source consensus required" as a discretionary sanction on all articles on the topic of Polish history during World War II (1933-45), including the Holocaust in Poland. On articles where "reliable-source consensus required" is in effect, when a source that is not a high quality source (an article in a peer-reviewed scholarly journals, an academically focused book by a reputable publisher, and/or an article published by a reputable institution) is added and subsequently challenged by reversion, no editor may reinstate the source without first obtaining consensus on the talk page of the article in question or consensus about the reliability of the source in a discussion at the ].{{pb}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{censor}} |
|
|
{{FAQ|collapsed=no}} |
|
|
{{Article history |
|
|action1=FAC |
|
|action1=FAC |
|
|action1date=2005-03-09, 00:01:16 |
|
|action1date=2005-03-09, 00:01:16 |
|
|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Featured_article_candidates/Archived_nominations/March_2005#Holocaust |
|
|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Holocaust/archive1 |
|
|action1result=not promoted |
|
|action1result=not promoted |
|
|action1oldid=10947640 |
|
|action1oldid=10947640 |
Line 8: |
Line 19: |
|
|action2=GAN |
|
|action2=GAN |
|
|action2date=14:46, 19 January 2006 |
|
|action2date=14:46, 19 January 2006 |
|
|action2link= |
|
|
|action2result=listed |
|
|action2result=listed |
|
|action2oldid=35815819 |
|
|action2oldid=35815819 |
|
|
|
|
<!-- seeming GA arbitrary listing (no {{GAC}} tag) http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:The_Holocaust&diff=prev&oldid=35817227 --> |
|
|
|
|
|
<!-- FAC tag added without actually truly posting for candidacy at ] 18:53, 23 May 2006 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:The_Holocaust&diff=next&oldid=54535738 |
|
|
Tag removed 01:08, 3 June 2006 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:The_Holocaust&diff=next&oldid=56590481 --> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|action3=GAR |
|
|action3=GAR |
|
|action3date=12:49, 5 July 2006 |
|
|action3date=12:49, 5 July 2006 |
|
|action3link=Misplaced Pages:Good_articles/Disputes/Archive_3#Holocaust |
|
|action3link=Misplaced Pages:Good_articles/Disputes/Archive_3#Holocaust |
|
|action3result=kept |
|
|action3result=kept |
Line 25: |
Line 30: |
|
|action4=FAC |
|
|action4=FAC |
|
|action4date=15:48, 16 November 2006 |
|
|action4date=15:48, 16 November 2006 |
|
|action4link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Holocaust 2 |
|
|action4link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Holocaust/archive2 |
|
|action4result=not promoted |
|
|action4result=not promoted |
|
|action4oldid=88175095 |
|
|action4oldid=88175095 |
|
<!--Oddly no {{FAC}} tag on page during debate and not listed at ] (see http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:The_Holocaust&diff=next&oldid=142956072 & http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:The_Holocaust&diff=next&oldid=143011334)--> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|action5=GAR |
|
|action5=GAR |
Line 41: |
Line 45: |
|
|action6result=reviewed |
|
|action6result=reviewed |
|
|action6oldid=137140199 |
|
|action6oldid=137140199 |
|
{{calm talk}}--] 04:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
<!-- See http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:The_Holocaust&diff=next&oldid=143011334 --> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|action7=GAN |
|
|currentstatus=FFAC |
|
|
|
|action7date=21:09, 3 October 2007 |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|action7link=Talk:The Holocaust/Archive 16#Quick-failed "good article" nomination |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
|
|
|
|action7result=fail |
|
{{WikiProject Jewish history|class=B|importance=Top|nested=yes}} |
|
|
|
|action7oldid=162023379 |
|
{{WikiProject Germany|nested=yes |
|
|
|class=B |
|
|
<!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |
|
|
|B-Class-1=yes/no |
|
|
<!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |
|
|
|B-Class-2=yes/no |
|
|
<!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |
|
|
|B-Class-3=yes |
|
|
<!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |
|
|
|B-Class-4=yes/no |
|
|
<!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |
|
|
|B-Class-5=yes |
|
|
|importance=Top |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Discrimination|nested=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Poland|class=B|importance=Top|nested=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Judaism|class=B|importance=high|nested=yes}} |
|
|
{{disaster management|class=B|nested=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject History|class=B|importance=Top|nested=yes}} |
|
|
{{LGBTProject|class=B|nested=yes}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{WP1.0|v0.5=pass|class=B|category=History|VA=yes|WPCD=yes|coresup=yes|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{FAOL|Portuguese|pt:Holocausto}} |
|
|
{{archive box|auto=short}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|action8=GAN |
|
{{calm talk}} |
|
|
|
|action8date=23:18, 2 February 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|action8link=/GA1 |
|
|
|action8result=fail |
|
|
|action8oldid= |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|action9=GAN |
|
==Article protected== |
|
|
|
|action9date=02:40, 25 May 2023 (UTC) |
|
I've had the article protected to stop the edit warring over the disputed content being added by ]. Hanzo, I suggest that you stop trying to revert to the massive changes involved in that single diff, and to present any changes you would like to see made in the article. That diff is not acceptable. I advise going slowly and adding material in a manner that other editors can easily see and view your changes. Your edit summaries continue to be uninformative. This style of editing has been objected to several times and it must cease. There is no consensus for your changes, SlimVirgin and I have both objected to your changes. – ] <small>]</small> 19:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|action9link=/GA2 |
|
|
|action9result=pass |
|
|
|action9oldid=1156884241 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|currentstatus=GA |
|
:You? I discussed with you, you stopped objecting and asked for "next step" (no one else joined). You revert to the version which claims Jasenovac was an extermination camp (it wasn't), and ] is linked as ] (click them!). And so on. It's just a badly made article. The only thing I thought was above average was the quotes (well done, unlike awkard ones in the Arkan and Iwo Jima articles I removed), and I was impressed by the section about the overall responsibility of Germany, not just the folks in SS and police (een if there's mentioned "government transport offices arranged the trains for deportation to the camps", but not the ] itself - needs a cleanup and interlinking, too). --] 19:39, 3 August 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|dykdate=5 June 2023 |
|
::You need to re-read what I wrote, I did not 'stop objecting' and give consensus. Since no consensus was reached, I asked you what you thought the next step should be. I was hoping you would opt for my suggestion to make small edits, slowly implemented, with clear edit summaries; instead you chose to continue your edit war. I don't think reverting back to the version containing your massive and disputed changes is appropriate and I oppose it completely. I suggest you find another way, perhaps taking it ]. – ] <small>]</small> 19:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|dykentry=... that ] were enacted by ] in the years leading up to ''']''' ''(victims pictured)''{{-?}} |
|
|
|dyknom=Template:Did you know nominations/The Holocaust |
|
|
|topic=History |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=GA|collapsed=yes|vital=yes|listas=Holocaust|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Disaster management|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Discrimination|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Ethnic groups|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Germany|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Jewish history|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Judaism|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Death|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject European history|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Human rights|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Israel|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Philosophy|importance=High|ethics=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Disability}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Military history |WWII=yes |German=yes |B-Class-1=yes |B-Class-2=yes |B-Class-3=yes |B-Class-4=yes |B-Class-5=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Press | subject = article | title = Topics that spark Misplaced Pages 'edit wars' revealed | org = ] | url = http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23354613 | date = 18 July 2013 | archiveurl = | archivedate =}} |
|
|
<!-- The following comments relate to actions in the article history. Per the documentation for that template it should not include comments, so they have been moved from inside the template to here --> |
|
|
<!-- This comment relates to action2 and action3 |
|
|
seeming --GA arbitrary listing (no {{GAC}} tag) http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:The_Holocaust&diff=prev&oldid=35817227 |
|
|
FAC tag added without actually truly posting for candidacy at ] 18:53, 23 May 2006 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:The_Holocaust&diff=next&oldid=54535738 |
|
|
Tag removed 01:08, 3 June 2006 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:The_Holocaust&diff=next&oldid=56590481 --> |
|
|
<!-- This comment and the next relate to action4. |
|
|
Oddly no {{FAC}} tag on page during debate and not listed at ] (see http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:The_Holocaust&diff=next&oldid=142956072 & http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:The_Holocaust&diff=next&oldid=143011334)--><!-- That is partially correct. It was correctly archived. It wasn't correctly templated on the talk page, but was noticed. See http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:The_Holocaust&diff=prev&oldid=86927789 --> |
|
|
<!-- This comment relates to action6 |
|
|
See http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:The_Holocaust&diff=next&oldid=143011334 --> |
|
|
{{Banner holder |collapsed=yes |1= |
|
|
{{old move|collapse=yes |
|
|
|date=30 January 2007 |
|
|
|from=The Holocaust |
|
|
|destination=Holocaust |
|
|
|result=Not moved |
|
|
|link=Talk:The Holocaust/Archive 13#Requested move |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|date2=21 August 2010 |
|
:::What is disputed? Okay, you guy may have all the homosexuals you want in the intro. Yay. I'd go and insert this NOW, but no, protected. So no yay. Anything else? --] 20:11, 3 August 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|from2=The Holocaust |
|
::::You will need to propose any changes you want to make to the article. Merely re-citing the disputed diff or any other diffs is not appropriate. The article is too long and the diffs are too massive to easily review. I also think comments such as the above stretch ], and make it more difficult to gain the cooperation of other editors. – ] <small>]</small> 20:15, 3 August 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|destination2=Holocaust |
|
|
|result2=No consensus |
|
|
|link2=Talk:The Holocaust/Archive 25#Requested move |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|date3=10 June 2013 |
|
::::Thanks, Dreadstar, for slowing this thing down. This is the second time I had to wade my way through a huge number of small edits, done seconds apart. It is not conducive to a reflective response. --] 20:30, 3 August 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|from3=The Holocaust |
|
|
|destination3=Holocaust |
|
|
|result3=Moved |
|
|
|link3=Talk:The Holocaust/Archive 28#Requested move |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|date4=1 August 2013 |
|
== Estimates of Holocaust deaths == |
|
|
|
|from4=Holocaust |
|
|
|destination4=The Holocaust |
|
|
|result4=Moved/Reverted |
|
|
|link4=Talk:The Holocaust/Archive 28#Follow-up discussion about a hasty decision |
|
|
|
|
|
|
}} |
|
This starts out as a question for ] about a comment that he made on ] but I am placing it here as being more appropriate to this Talk Page than to that one. |
|
|
|
{{Annual readership |width=570 |days=182}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{Section sizes}} |
|
On ], ] commented that estimates of Holocaust deaths range from 5.1 million to "somewhat beyond 6 million". In my very cursory review of Google results, I've only seen estimates ranging from 5.1 million to 5.9 million. I'm curious what estimates there that are beyond 6 million. |
|
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn |
|
And, yes, I realize that this a hugely inexact science. Nonetheless, I think it is worthwhile to understand what the differences are between estimates. So far, I have only seen two kinds of estimates: one that goes country by country based on a "estimated percentage killed" and another which provides total deaths in concentration camps. |
|
|
|
|target=Talk:The Holocaust/Archive index |
|
|
|
|
|
|mask=Talk:The Holocaust/Archive <#> |
|
I'm sure the people who have conducted these estimates have been very thorough and have methodologies which have been both defended and criticized. Any links to online resources in this regard would be much appreciated. |
|
|
|
|leading_zeros=0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|indexhere=yes}} |
|
I would like to see a more in-depth treatment of these studies and their methodologies. (The underlying agenda being to lay out the numerical case against Holocaust deniers such as Igor the Otter.) |
|
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|
|
|
|archiveheader = {{tan}} |
|
--] 17:27, 5 August 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|
|
|
|
|
|counter = 41 |
|
:No one will ever know the correct number of victims. ] himself, who supervised the Final Solution, and presumably received the best available reports, claimed the number was 6 million, and this appears to be the most commonly used 'ballpark' number. Our job is to state the views of the most reputable scholarly sources on this topic, which we ]. There is no point in having prolonged discussions about this issue – if someone has a better source, that can add additional insight into this topic, then go ahead and supply it. Otherwise, idle speculations and ] don't belong here. ] 18:01, 5 August 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
::...in particular, since there are many different definitions of "Jew", and for many victims it will be hard to retroactively decide if they fulfilled each or any of those. But for Richard: The ] article has estimates up to 6.2 million. But, if I may: Don't lay out "the numerical case against Holocaust deniers". At best they will ignore you, at worst they will try to pick minor discrepancies and generate a lot of hot air from them. The evidence for the Holocaust is overwhelming. There is no need to elevate the deniers position by arguing on their turf. --] 22:00, 6 August 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|algo = old(30d) |
|
|
|
|
|
|archive = Talk:The Holocaust/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
|
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
__TOC__ |
|
==Sources== |
|
|
|
|
|
The "Climax" section (perhaps an unfortunate choice of words as well--please think these things through) contains no citations sourcing its content even though it purports to provide a quotation (that is, in an actual "quotation box") of Himmler's which comes "closer than ever before to stating explicitly that he was intent on exterminating the Jews of Europe". It seems to me that the assertions made in the section are significant and need to be cited or else this constitutes OR. Further anything in quotation marks, especially anything that has been translated from a foreign language and so is not a strict quotation, warrants special attribution. The footnote numeration jumps from 138 to 141 on either end of this section, so I'm not sure if there was some kind of editing error here. I'd like to throw in a "citation needed" flag but, alas, the administrators in their wisdom have locked the article. Perhaps one of them, SlimVirgin for example, could flag the section on my behalf. |
|
|
|
|
|
:The article is locked, but in the meanwhile, here are some sources for ]: |
|
|
:* |
|
|
:* |
|
|
:* |
|
|
:* |
|
|
:* |
|
|
:* |
|
|
:] 23:03, 6 August 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Archived== |
|
|
I archived a big chunk to ], feel free to move any still 'live' conversations back or add more of the above to it. I basically left the 'protection' conversation on down, and archived the most recent soapy, troll-y stuff..;0 ] <small>]</small> 07:24, 26 August 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Number of dead at Auschwitz== |
|
|
|
|
|
This page cites 1.4 million dead, but if you click on the link to the Auschwitz page they cite 1.1 million dead in the comprehensive introduction. Now I am well aware that these numbers are individual historian's estimates, but I feel that in the interests of coherence (i.e. it's a bit messy to have different numbers cited in different articles in wikipedia), that there are two possible remedies: |
|
|
1. use the same numbers in all articles (but which ones?) |
|
|
2. present the numbers as a range, e.g. 1.1-1.4 million. This would again create the problem of which sources to range, but given that one is using a larger sample this would seem to give improved veracity. Additionally, this would impress upon readers that these numbers have been arrived at in different ways. |
|
|
As a provisional suggestion, I would think that the range should be from the low conservative estimates (which are often based on what can be ascertained through direct records), and the slightly larger estimates, but which are equally valid, that employ for example pre and post war population statistics and eyewitness accounts/admissions e.g. Eichmann's. |
|
|
If this seems sensible it would seem that it could be taken as a convention for numbers cited in Holocaust articles, although in some parts this is already the case. Comments? |
|
|
] 07:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:Presenting the numbers as a range seems like a good option to me, but it's not a matter I'm terribly knowledgeable about. I generally just watch this page for vandalism and racist POV pushing. <b><font face="courier" color="#737CA1">]</font></b> <small><b><font color="#C11B17">(])</font></b></small> 08:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== probable inaccuracy == |
|
|
|
|
|
towards the bottom (in ('Climax') the claim is made (unreferenced) that "At Auschwitz, up to 20,000 people were killed and incinerated every day". Is this true? 20,000 a day is 140,000 a week. That means in ten weeks you have 1.4 million -perhaps the total number over two years. This single claim is not required in the context and probably should just be deleted (unless someone can source it). Can any user make the change or what is the deal? |
|
|
] 09:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:This protection level of this article has been reduced to 'semi' so that editors may now make any necessary changes.- ] 09:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::Maybe the claim is inaccurate - surely it needs to be sourced. But "up to" does not mean "on average." Toward the end of the war I believe rates of murder went up drastically; there is no reason to think that the maximum number of people killed in a week is anywhere's close to the average. I think the problem in the sentence is "every day." No sentence that has this syntax "Up to ... every day" make sense. ] | ] 10:59, 2 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::: I found the number unlikely based on the other figures quoted in the article. "According to Rudolf Höß, commandant of Auschwitz, bunker 1 held 800 people, and bunker 2 held 1,200." A few sentences on: "The gas was then pumped out, the bodies were removed (which would take up to four hours), gold fillings in their teeth were extracted with pliers by dentist prisoners, and women's hair was cut". So in twenty-four hours it might be possible to kill six loads of two thousand people, which is 12,000 people. It doesn't say how many gassings a day were performed, but it seems like an unlikely high number. Have deleted the sentence. |
|
|
:::] 02:20, 3 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::::As far as capacity, you may wish to note that Yad Vashem says: "Four chambers were in use at Birkenau, each with the potential to kill 6,000 people daily." . ] 03:13, 3 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Racist definition of Holocaust == |
|
|
|
|
|
The definition of Holocaust should include all people, not just Jews. It is largely Jewish scholars that omit everyone else. It appears this is solely because the rest don't really matter to them. --] 20:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:The article does mention the diverse victims of the Holocaust. Political prisoners, Jehovah's Witnesses, and homosexuals were sent to concentration camps as punishment. Members of these three groups were not targeted, as were Jews and Gypsies, for systematic murder. Nevertheless, many died in the camps from starvation, disease, exhaustion, and brutal treatment.- ] 20:24, 5 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::I do wonder if Mr. Khalitun read as far as the second paragraph of the article. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 20:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::: I see the second paragraph and the list of other peoples, yet the definition of Holocaust in this article refers to Jews, largely because Jewish writers are only concerned about the Jewish victims. That is as racist as the Nazi perpetrators of the Holocaust. If the massacre of Jews is called the Holocaust, what is the massacre of non-Jews called ? Is there really no name for the murder of so many people. --] 01:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::: Nobody has provided any opposing reasoning. According to Misplaced Pages guidelines there is therefore consensus. Anyone who wants to restrict the Holocaust to only Jews, when so millions of others suffered the same fate, is being racist and heartless anyway. --] 14:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::The "last man standing theory" of discussion does not work. Consensus about what? If you read the article, we do not define Holocaust - in fact, I would claim that it is not the task of an encyclopedia to define anything. We describe how the term is used, and have two very reliable sources for the current lead sentence. We also immediately mention the non-Jewish victims in the next sentence. Your has a number of problem. It drops the references from the first sentence, it omits some other information, and it contains the (mis-)leading and unsourced phrase "Jewish scholars do not ..." when what they allegedly do is neither universal among Jewish scholars, nor restricted to Jewish scholars. --] 15:06, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Garbage ! The article very clearly defines the Holocaust as being only "the term generally used to describe the killing of approximately six million ] during World War II". That is a racist definition. It should be "...up to 11 million people including Jews, Roma, homosexuals, Jehovah's winesses, ......" It doesn't matter if they merely "mention" others. They are wrongly not included in the definition. You can not have a "reliable source" for this definition. It's not physics or astronomy, it's purely opinion. I can get you references that include all victims. It wouldn't make any difference. The "last man standing theory" is defined in the guidelines as consensus. --] 18:06, 9 September 2007 (UTC) Are you Jewish ? Is that why you are putting forward such poor reasoning yet clinging on to a racist definition. |
|
|
:*It is you who are a racist anti-Semite. This is clear in the ad homenim and slanderous remark, "It appears this is solely because the rest don't really matter to them." All major Jewish organizations make it plain that the Nazis killed many other people, and had genocidal policies toward the Roma. The word "Holocaust" is not a generic word referring to any slaughter. It historically refers to the Nazi's genocidal campaign against the Jews - that is how the word was first applied to genocide (prior to the nazi campaign against the Jews, the word holocaust did not refer to genocide and was used in other, often innoccuous, ways). Now, to claim that the Nazis hated Jews does not mean that the Nazi's hated ''only'' Jews; to claim that the Nazis conducted a genocidal campaign against Jews does not mean that the Nazis conducted a genocidal campaign against ''only'' Jews. You do not understand simple basic logic: to say that "X occured" is not the same thing as saying "Y did not occur." But as you are a racist you are probably incapable of logical thought. At this point I see no reason to continue responding to a blatant anti-semite. The discussion is over. ] | ] 18:21, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:*Apparently you have trouble with comprehending the English language. No, the article does not define the term. It ''describes'' it. This is something completely different. And of course we can have reliable sources about history, and of course history is not "just opinion". If you have reliable sources that show a more inclusive use of the word, by all means bring them on, and we can incorporate them. I don't know what my religion or ethnicity has to do with my reasoning. Anyways, if you are interested, information about one is easily available, and information about the other should be deducable from other comments I have made. --] 18:46, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
More irrelevant and falsely abusive garbage ! Most of my friends are Jewish so forget trying to distract attention from the facts with the anti-semitic crap. Most jews do not include anyone but Jews in the definition of Holocaust, despite the millions that were murdered. They know about them, sure, but they don't include them in any definition of the Holocaust. The United Nations does : "There can be no reversing the unique tragedy of the Holocaust. It must be remembered, with shame and horror, for as long as human memory continues. Only by remembering can we pay fitting tribute to the victims. Millions of innocent Jews '''and members of other minorities''' were murdered in the most barbarous ways imaginable. We must never forget those men, women and children, or their agony." —— United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan, January 27, 2006." Misplaced Pages's definition and those that support it are racists. --] 18:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
:Your "fiends" are Jewish? Good ] there. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 18:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== "eastern Europe" == |
|
Misplaced Pages itself includes the United Nations definition as including all victims - not just Jewish. As representitives of all governments that is far higher authority than some of the petty references provided. That reference has already been inserted. You can not have inconistency by one article defining it as Jewish only and another including all victims. Nobody with any sense, reason or compassion would want to exclude all the other groups that were massacred anyway. --] 18:59, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
*Um, you can't use Misplaced Pages as a source. Even if your change gains consensus -- which it hasn't, as you're the only one promoting it -- we can't use as a source in the article. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 19:04, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think this is better suited to a notice/question than an edit request. |
|
Why not ? --] 19:22, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
*Because Misplaced Pages is an unreliable source! Seriously! Same thing my brother the professor tells his students -- if you want to use Misplaced Pages reliably, you have to go to the reliable sources that Misplaced Pages cites, since anyone whosoever can edit Misplaced Pages. So, for example, instead of quoting Misplaced Pages there, you'd need to cite Annan directly. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 19:38, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In this article "Eastern Europe" is mostly written as such, with the first "e" capitalised, but at several points it is written as "eastern Europe". (There are too many sections to list so please ctrl+f if you want to see.) The first way is much more common, and the article is inconsistent on it |
|
:::*The original source from the United Nations News Centre has been inserted. The United Nations consistently describe the Holocaust as including non-Jews : “The Holocaust was a unique and undeniable tragedy,” Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said in a video message played to a special memorial ceremony in the General Assembly Hall on the Holocaust in which 6 million Jews, '''500,000 Roma and Sinti and other minorities, disabled and homosexuals''' were killed." --] 20:07, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Of course, this is not a scholary publication, but rather a excerpt from a remembrance speech. It does not deal with the problem of definition. It may, however, be used as one piece of evidence for Salom's POV. Assuming for the sake of the argument that we accept this speech as a ], it would still not justify Salom's edit. In that case, we have conflicting reliable sources, and ] would require us to "fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a reliable source, and do so in proportion to the prominence of each". In my opinion, the first step towards this would be a review of a representative sample of reliable sources to enable us to gauge the current state of the discussuion.--] 20:13, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is "eastern Europe" acceptable for reasons I'm not aware of, for example as a general term for "Central and Eastern Europe" that I haven't heard before? If so, my bad, but if not then I request somebody to change all instances of "eastern Europe" to "Eastern Europe" for the sake of consistency. |
|
:::::You can get hundreds of references for this in favour and hundreds of references against. It doesn't prove anything. The fact that mainly Jewish authors consider the Holocaust as Jewish only is already in the article. This already accounts for the the two definitions. Why anyone would want to exclude non-Jews anyway is pure and callous bigotry. --] 20:19, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for your consideration ] (]) 20:00, 28 November 2024 (UTC) |
|
::::::Let me try again. We do not decide which version we want or which we think would be more fair, or improve the world. We only report how the term ''is'' actually used. I'm still missing any evidence that "mainly Jewish authors consider the Holocaust as Jewish only". And to be clear: No-one (except for some fringe assholes) denies that the Nazis killed millions of Jews and millions of members of various minorities, including Roma, homosexuals, Jehovas witnesses, and others. The question is wether the ''term'' "Holocaust" applies all of the killing, or only to part of it. --] 20:30, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Sephardic and Mizrahi Jewish victims in the holocaust == |
|
:::The United Nations any many others include all victims. Most Jews and some others do not. There are different opinions. Including all victims and then pointing out that the Jewish definition does not include non-Jews accounts for both viewpoints. The problem here is that there are some Jews who are trying to impose only the largely Jewish viewpoint. --] 20:36, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There were also Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews who were sent to concentration camps by the Nazis. |
|
I agree with Salom. While the article does state other groups besides the Jews were killed, it breezes over the other half of the victims, and deals almost exclusively with the Jewish death toll. Indeed, one of the first people to respond to the original post said "it '''mentions''' them". The article shouldn't merely "mention" the deaths of one half of the victims and spend the rest of the time talking about the other half. ] 20:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
For example, greek Jews, Lybian Jews and Italian Jews. It is worth to correct the opening statement in this article stating that the holocaust in the genocide of European Jews. ] (]) 18:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Most Holocaust scholars do not regard the fates of Jews outside of continental Europe as being part of the Holocaust, though some do and there has been a trend among scholars to do so as the years have gone on—maybe an acknowledgement of that controversy is due in the lead. In general, this article could do with more historiography. <span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧁</span>]<span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧂</span> 01:25, 3 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 December 2024 == |
|
== Murder | Executed == |
|
|
I see the word "murdered" all over this article. when a state kills someone, it is typically called an execution, not a murder. When a supposedly neutral article calls an execution a murder, it is condemning the killing. Condemnation has no place in wiki, so I think that all references to the word murder (unless it was one individual killing another) should be removed and replaced with a more neutral word. ] 20:42, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Sources defining the Holocaust == |
|
{{edit extended-protected|The Holocaust|answered=yes}} |
|
|
At the first line of the basic definition of the Holocaust, I would like to add 'Slavs, especially the Polish' to the list of groups that were targeted by the Holocaust. Obviously, the Jews weren't the only ones getting persecuted, and to glance over the fact that about 2 million Poles were killed is offensive. ] (]) 16:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{not done}}:<!-- Template:EEp --> see faq #2 ] (]) 09:10, 5 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
:(Let me preface by saying that lovely Jewish friends and influences have been and are important to me. Zionism is distinct from Judaism. None of this is to diminish the disgrace of the Nazis’ targeting of Jewish people. However, the Nazis were supremacists, and supremacists will target any that are outside their group. It therefore follows that the Nazis would likely target many other than Jewish people, and they did. Those murders deserve to be acknowledged, and those murders do not deserved to have the memory of them suppressed by restriction of the only available and commonly-understood word {Holocaust} so as to deny it to them.) |
|
|
:This is a question that relates to issues of multiple pages. |
|
|
:To the post below ____ at ] at the note: |
|
|
:<blockquote>“Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 December 2024 At the first line of the basic definition of the Holocaust, I would like to add 'Slavs, especially the Polish' to the list of groups that were targeted by the Holocaust. Obviously, the Jews weren't the only ones getting persecuted, and to glance over the fact that about 2 million Poles were killed is offensive. TheRealNeurologix (talk) 16:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC) <nowiki>{{ This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.}}</nowiki>"</blockquote> |
|
|
:I agree. It takes a good bit of digging to find the page <]>. It should not take any digging, it should be part of the definition, and should be listed under Holocaust, with all affected subgroups having their own pages as would be useful titled such as “Nazi Holocaust against the people”. |
|
|
:Type in <]> and you get a page that DOES NOT EVEN MENTION THE NON-JEWISH VICTIMS. Explain to me please how that is acceptable. Obviously the Jewish victims were central in the Nazis’ warped corrupt policy. But there were about 18million killed by the Nazis’ policies against non-Aryan people, of which 17,000,000 - 6,000,000 = 11,000,000 were non-Jewish. Do they really deserve to be forgotten? |
|
|
:The reservation of the word Holocaust — to many signifying the Nazi targeting-for-extermination of any of the groups it declared objectionable — to only Jewish victims would be fine if there were a general word for the Nazi extermination intent and program. |
|
|
:But no such word is offered. |
|
|
:Therefore, such reservation of the word Holocaust unfairly relegates the murders of Slav and Sinti-Romani to some other difficult-to-find place to which not even a pointer is supplied. |
|
|
:The complete fact of Nazi genocide must be acknowledged, and information about it pointed to. To do otherwise is to put this page into political service of Zionism. |
|
|
:The note (b) under Holocaust "... ], p. 6, |
|
|
:<blockquote>- "Echoing this view, some have contended that the expression 'the Holocaust' ought to refer not only to the encounter between the Third Reich and the Jews but also to 'the horrors that Poles, other Slavs, and Gypsies endured at the hands of the Nazis' (Lukas, 1986: 220)…” - </blockquote> |
|
|
:… illustrates this. |
|
|
:If the word “HOLOCAUST" is to be reserved exclusively to Jewish victims (which I agree/think were the identity suffering the most from the Holocaust), then that Decision risks denying_the_holocaust of the Roma/Sinti, Slavs, and others. And THAT (Roma, Slav, etc.) information is quite tedious to find in Misplaced Pages (it OUGHT TO BE linked right next to any exclusivist definition of “Holocaust”). The EFFECT then is that reserving the word "Holocaust" to only the Jewish victims is political: it thus lends itself _the_more_ to service of Zionism (and yes, sure, the page is not about Zionism, and I agree it should Not be, but if this definition prevails without an inclusive term offered alongside to replace the Universal meaning of Holocaust then the page becomes exclusivist and in service to Zionism). |
|
|
:There exists a page called "Romani Holocaust" ]. I.e. it is also a ‘Holocaust’ page. |
|
|
:This current page “The Holocaust” page should ''likewise'' be called “Jewish Holocaust”_* and there should be a “Nazi Holocaust (also see _*)” page listing the Nazi Holocaust in entire with links to specific pages. |
|
|
:This page should be called “Jewish Holocaust, the Shoah”. |
|
|
:<blockquote><blockquote>_* Generally, and contrary to the naming convention like “Romani Holocaust": clear terminology should express “A’s campaign regarding B”, thus generally encapsulate Actor_or_Culprit and Victim. Thus the “Nazi Holocaust” would mean all of the Nazis' extermination attempts against any groups based on the identification of that group. That requires that the victim group be put second, and the culprit group be placed first. </blockquote><blockquote>On that basis there should be a suite of pages called (e.g.) Nazi Holocaust against/of Jewish people, Nazi Holocaust/of against Romani/Sinti people, Nazi Holocaust against/of Slavic people, Nazi Holocaust against/of Jehovah’s Witness people, etc. All should be linked from a page called “Nazi Holocaust” which would mean holocaust done by Nazis, against any. </blockquote></blockquote> |
|
|
:Note that in note (b) of the page there are suggestions that NEITHER the words Holocaust nor Shoah should be used. I’d say they require a definition, at which I’ve hinted above. And unless the terms are shown to be unacceptable regardless of definition and contextual framing, those terms should be used (accepted from usage, with restrictions of definition that are necessary to ensure both fairness and precision). ] (]) 19:41, 7 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Non Jewish == |
|
Below are some reliable sources on the topic. Please feel free to add more. --] 20:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The holocaust was not just Jewish murders. There were five million others murder. This page is a lie ] (]) 11:19, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
* : "Holocaust: the systematic state-sponsored killing of six million Jewish men, women, and children and millions of others by Nazi Germany and its collaborators during World War II." |
|
|
|
:{{tq|The Holocaust was the genocide of European Jews during World War II. Between 1941 and 1945, Nazi Germany and its collaborators systematically murdered some six million Jews across German-occupied Europe, around two-thirds of Europe's Jewish population.}}" This page is about that, for other genocides look further {{tq|Separate Nazi persecutions killed a similar or larger number of non-Jewish civilians and prisoners of war (POWs);}} If you only had an ability to read with comprehension. ] (]) 13:42, 13 December 2024 (UTC) |
|
* : "the mass slaughter of European civilians and especially Jews by the Nazis during World War II " |
|
|
* : "the mass murder of Jews under the German Nazi regime in World War II." |
|
|
* : "the systematic mass slaughter of European Jews in Nazi concentration camps during World War II" (they have a number of references to other sources, some including the phrase "Jews and other ...", some referring to Jews exclusively). |
|
I think this is better suited to a notice/question than an edit request.
In this article "Eastern Europe" is mostly written as such, with the first "e" capitalised, but at several points it is written as "eastern Europe". (There are too many sections to list so please ctrl+f if you want to see.) The first way is much more common, and the article is inconsistent on it
Is "eastern Europe" acceptable for reasons I'm not aware of, for example as a general term for "Central and Eastern Europe" that I haven't heard before? If so, my bad, but if not then I request somebody to change all instances of "eastern Europe" to "Eastern Europe" for the sake of consistency.
There were also Sephardic and Mizrahi Jews who were sent to concentration camps by the Nazis.
For example, greek Jews, Lybian Jews and Italian Jews. It is worth to correct the opening statement in this article stating that the holocaust in the genocide of European Jews. 2A06:C701:4D27:3500:1CE4:442C:6349:35F3 (talk) 18:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
At the first line of the basic definition of the Holocaust, I would like to add 'Slavs, especially the Polish' to the list of groups that were targeted by the Holocaust. Obviously, the Jews weren't the only ones getting persecuted, and to glance over the fact that about 2 million Poles were killed is offensive. TheRealNeurologix (talk) 16:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC)