Talk:Holodomor denial - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mzajac (talk | contribs) at 21:35, 30 March 2023 (→Obvious POV Fork of Holodomor Genocide Question: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 21:35, 30 March 2023 by Mzajac (talk | contribs) (→Obvious POV Fork of Holodomor Genocide Question: Reply)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Holodomor 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.

Article policies

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

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 6 months

Template:Vital article

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

keep, 15 November 2010 (UTC), see discussion.
keep, 1 January 2008, see discussion.

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.

Ukraine Mid‑importance

	Ukraine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ukraine 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.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine
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.

Soviet Union Mid‑importance

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 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.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union
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.

Russia: Science & education / History / Politics and law Low‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Misplaced Pages. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the science and education in Russia task force.
	This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
	This article is supported by the politics and law of Russia task force.

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.

On 26 May 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved from Denial of the Holodomor to Holodomor denial. The result of the discussion was moved.

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6

This page has archives. Sections older than 182 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

Indisputably man-made?

I don’t know enough about the subject to make an overall judgement, but it seems the only source cited to declare affirmatively it was an intentional and man-made crisis is one book from 1985? Happy to be corrected if wrong, but seems to be quite a problem, if not NPOV, then seriously under-cited 2600:1008:B14E:B0DE:3170:2558:F4A5:94BF (talk) 05:20, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

"Man-made" and intentional are two totally different things. Amartya Sen claims that virtually all XX century famines were man-made, so Holodomor is more a rule than an exception. Paul Siebert (talk) 05:53, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

That’s not true. Although the Soviets did politicize famine relief in other famines, the Holodomor was not the same as any others. See Andriewsky 2015 pp 26–27, the sixteen points quoted from Mace 1988, plus the fact that the Soviets attempted to completely deny the famine then explain it away for the next 55 years.

There has been significant debate over the last decades about whether it met the legal definition of genocide. But there is no academic debate over its artificiality, even among opponents of the genocide view. Andriewsky p 37:

“What is significant here—and a measure of how much the understanding of the Holodomor has changed—is the very narrowness of the debate that Soldatenko describes. Even the opponents of the concept of the Holodomor as genocide accept the basic outlines of what happened. Among historians, there is no significant argument over the number of people who died.There is a general agreement that they died as a result of the policies implemented by the Party leadership, the introduction of unrealistically high grain quotas, and the confiscation of grain resources and food. Historians of Ukraine are no longer debating whether the Famine was the result of natural causes. The academic debate appears to come down to the issue of intentions, to whether the special measures undertaken in Ukraine in the winter of 1932–33 that intensified starvation were aimed at Ukrainians as such. For Soldatenko, however, the debate is really about the significance of what happened—no small issue, by any means. For him and others, the Holodomor was the tragic price—a terribly steep but ultimately justifiable price—that was paid for ‘modernization.’”

—Michael Z. 04:47, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Please, read carefully what I wrote, and take it literally: I said that the words "man-made" do not imply anything, for all XX century famines were man-made. That doesn't mean Holodomor was just an average famine, but it doesn't make it a usual famine either. "Man-made" means nothing specific.

My words referred to "mad-made" not to Holodomor. Paul Siebert (talk) 16:07, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I don’t think you get it, and you’ve ignored my references. The debate about intentionality is the question of whether there was an intention to commit genocide against Ukrainians. There is no debate that mass famine deaths resulted from intentional acts. Mass deaths were intentionally caused, not only by natural causes or accident, nor only by “man-made” necessity or incompetence, as some Holodomor deniers claim. Intentional actions were taken in the knowledge that mass deaths would result, and that determined who was to die. —Michael Z. 21:44, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

And I don't think you get what I say. I never denied the fact that Holodomor is a subject of debates. Yes, a significant fraction of authors emphasise intentionaity. I am not discussing that at all. I am just saying that it was "man-made" without any reservation, because ALL XX century famines were man-made. And that is why teh words "man-made" hardly carry any additional information about Holodomor. Paul Siebert (talk) 16:03, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

B.S. The phrase “man-made famine” is specifically used in books and in scholarly articles to denote aspects of the Holodomor, as well as of other specific events, that are different from other famines. —Michael Z. 20:22, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Google Scholar paints a different pictures than you claimed, and include the Bengal famine of 1943, and those in Sudan and Yemen, especially since 2017. Even your Google Books research should have alarmed you, as the first page is full of pre-1990s results and the second result was Mass Starvation: The History and Future of Famine (2017). The Holodomor is perhaps the most famous man-made famine but it was not the only one, and I think Siebert was correct. I ask you that you apologize to Siebert and recuse your "B.S." claim. Davide King (talk) 00:12, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Well, the first page of Google scholar has 9 sources that explicitly use such term in the title or snippet. 7 of them are about the Holodomor. Five include it in the title. All of them are about the Holodomor.. This is a confirmation that the term is mostly (although not exclusively) applied to the Ukrainian famine, exactly as Mzajac said. My very best wishes (talk) 03:20, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it was indisputably man-made, just as many other famines. Was it intentional? Well, with NKVD troops preventing movement of people from affected areas (which did happen as a matter of historical fact), that was basically an execution. My very best wishes (talk) 18:08, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 26 May 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:10, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Denial of the Holodomor → Holodomor denial –

Better fulfils the WP:CRITERIA:

Naturalness: it’s arguably less awkward.
Concision: it’s shorter.
Consistency: with titles Genocide denial and every other article and subcategory of Category:Genocide denial.

WP:COMMONNAME asks us to use the most widely used name in WP:RS’s and this is it. For example, the the LOC subject headings used worldwide in English-language bibliographic cataloguing are Holodomor denial and Holodomor denial literature, and Google Books Ngram shows that this term appears in sources, while the current title is below its threshold for inclusion. —Michael Z. 16:25, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Support per nomination. Naturalness, concision and WP:CONSISTENT with main title headers of other English Misplaced Pages articles that end with "denial", such as Armenian genocide denial, Bosnian genocide denial or Cambodian genocide denial, all as mentioned. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 18:06, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Support per the above comments. Lugnuts 09:50, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
Support for consistency. Capsulecap 23:38, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Deletion of Douglas Tottle And Modern politics Sections

Douglas Tottle SHOULD have is own section in the Holodomor genocide question page, but not in this one. On page 2, in the introduction of "Fraud, Famine and Fascism: The Ukrainian Genocide Myth from Hitter to Harvard" Tottle states that:

"However, while historians accept that famine occurred in Ukraine in 1932-1933

— as well as in other areas of the USSR — they are still debating the causes, extent and results.

My examination of the campaign and its charges of "Ukrainian genocide”

does not attempt to study the famine in any detailed way.

His book advocates the thesis that the narrative surrounding the holodomor originates in nazi and anti-communist propaganda, that framing it as a genocide is based on false and fabricated evidence. But it isnt a "claim that the Holodomor, a large-scale, man-made famine in Soviet Ukraine from 1932–1933, did not occur" - as stated in the opening of this page. Being there a page about the denial of the ucranian famine, and another about its status as an genocide, Tottle book pertains only to the latter O mutlei (talk) 05:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

The same aplies to the Modern politics sections. The Background section states that "the Holodomor has been a point of contention between Russia and Ukraine", and that "The Russian government does not recognize the famine as an act of genocide". So, again it pertains to the genocide question, not denial.

Same with Blinova articles in Sputnik News. She follows the same thesis as Tottle: although there was a famine, it was not a genocide and that the narrative around it was wildly exagerated propaganda. .

To Mironin is also not atributed a claim of denial: "Sigizmund Mironin's "Holodomor in the Rus" argued that the cause of the famine was not Stalin's policies, but rather the chaos engendered by the New Economic Policy". The same with Tkachenko and Mukhin. Yury Mukhin is a notorious supporter of conspiracy theories, but that seems insufficient to estabilish a issue of "Modern politics"

Every topic up until 2.2 Discusses the denial and cover up of the famine. Sections 2.3 and 3. do not.

If both of these belong in this article, "Denial of the Holodomor" should be better defined to encompass both topics. But since there are articles on the "genocide question" and "Holodomor in modern politics", the deletion of these topics (sections 2.3 to 3.2) Seems like thes best solution O mutlei (talk) 16:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

The book attributed to Tottle is not a source on the Holodomor. It is an example of genocide propaganda, and part of the subject of this article. So is the above-linked article on Russian state website Sputnik International.

An authoritative secondary source on bibliographic classification, the Library of Congress, uses Tottle as a definitive example for the subject heading “Holodomor denial literature,” which contains “works that diminish the scale and significance of the Ukrainian Famine of 1932-1933 or assert that it did not occur.” This is distinct from the subject of “Holodomor denial,” which is “the diminution of the scale and significance of the Ukrainian Famine of 1932-1933 or the assertion that it did not occur.” —Michael Z. 18:01, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

@Mzajac Its not relevant to my point wheter Tottle or Sputnik are credible sources or examples of propaganda. My point is that these are exemples of *denying the holodomor as a genocide* not a denial that it happened. And again this very article we are discussing defines *Denial of the Holodomor* as "the claim that the Holodomor, a large-scale, man-made famine in Soviet Ukraine from 1932–1933, did not occur". These are different things, as evident in the first parts of this article, which deals with soviet cover-ups and denial of the famine itself.

There is another wikipedia article about the claim that the holomodor isnt a genocide - the claim that Tottle and Sputnik make. So I dont see how these sections arent misplaced. If the claim that holomodor isnt a genocide is, in itsel, "holomodor denial" then there isnt an "Holodomor genocide question", just holomodor denial

Also “Holodomor denial literature" are works that comit “Holodomor denial" so I really dont get what your are trying to say with this distinction O mutlei (talk) 05:59, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Trying to be as clear as possible in explaining my issue:

there are two diferent things:

A= Denial and cover-up of the famine

B= Denial that the Holomodor was intentional, or genocidal in nature

This article defining claim that the Holodomor, a large-scale, man-made famine in Soviet Ukraine from 1932–1933, did not occur"

There is an wikipedia article that deals with A, this one, and another that deals with B, the Holodomor genocide question

This article up until section 2.2 gives exemples and discuss cases of A. Then, from section 2.3 onwards it give examples of B

If both A and B fall under the category of Holomodor Denial, and thus pertain to this article, or if Tottle is a fringe theorist and so a special case of B that constitute denialism, then that should be stated and explained, and so the latter parts and intro of this article should be extensively rewriten O mutlei (talk) 14:21, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I get what you’re saying. But a reliable secondary source classifies Tottle as Holodomor denial literature, because it comprises “the diminution of the scale and significance of the Ukrainian Famine of 1932-1933 or the assertion that it did not occur.” Your A’s and B’s are WP:original research. —Michael Z. 18:27, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

References

Holodomor Hoax: The Anatomy of a Lie Invented by West's Propaganda Machine and Holodomor Hoax: Joseph Stalin's Crime That Never Took Place

Obvious POV Fork of Holodomor Genocide Question

I think its quite clear. No real need to argue the point. Whatever part of the article can be salvaged can be incorporated in Holodomor genocide question then just redirect. Qayqran (talk) 21:27, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Nonsense. They are two different topics: an academic debate that went on from the 1990s to the 2010s on the one hand, and and negationist denial epitomized by a genre of Soviet and Russian propaganda on the other, for which the Library of Congress created specific separate subject headings. There is no overlap in the article content. —Michael Z. 21:35, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

Categories: