Talk:Holocaust denial

Skip to table of contents

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 Wikipedia? 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, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22: 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 [show] 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 Wikipedia should not conclude that everyone who is a Holocaust denier harbors antisemitic feelings.

Wikipedia 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. Wikipedia 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: [1], [2].

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: [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8].

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". Wikipedia must avoid using vague or unspecific terms, and words which do not accuractely reflect what reliable sources say.

Related archived discussion: [9], [10].

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: [11], [12], [13] and the appropriate section in the Auschwitz article.

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.

Holocaust denial was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

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
June 6, 2020	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Jewish history Top‑importance

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Wikipedia. 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 articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alternative Views Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia'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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Top‑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 Wikipedia. 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 articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Germany Mid‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. 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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

European history Mid‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe on Wikipedia. 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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law High‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please read before starting

Wikipedia policy notes for new editors:
A common objection made by new arrivals is that the article presents Holocaust denial in an unsympathetic light and that criticism of it is too extensive or violates Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View (WP:NPOV) policy. The sections of the policy that apply directly to this article are:

Also of particular relevance are:

In short, there are certain topics and fringe viewpoints we should not be giving false balance to. See Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE) for more context on how Wikipedia deals with fringe views.

Do not feed the trolls!
This article or its talk page has experienced trolling. The subject may be controversial or otherwise objectionable, but it is important to keep discussion on a high level. Do not get bogged down in endless debates that don't lead anywhere. Know when to deny recognition and refer to WP:PSCI, WP:FALSEBALANCE, WP:WikiVoice, or relevant notice-boards. Legal threats and trolling are never allowed!

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Historical revisionism (negationism)#Politically motivated historical revisionism|Holocaust denial]] The anchor (#Politically motivated historical revisionism) has been deleted.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 March 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

kindly change the picture under "Laws against Holocaust denial" from File:Holocaust_Denial_Laws_2023.png to the correct File:Holocaust_Denial_Laws_2022.svg, since it shows both Palestine and Israel borders under international law, while File:Holocaust_Denial_Laws_2023.png only shows only Israel Prosnu (talk) 14:39, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done M.Bitton (talk) 16:11, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Soft Holocaust Denial should be added?

https://www.thetower.org/article/the-rise-of-soft-holocaust-denial/ The matter with JK Rowling because the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_people_in_Nazi_Germany points here, but this article doesn't mention Rromani, LGBT, who were part of the Holocaust, even though they were not the most public. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jan/31/deborah-lipstadt-historian-donald-trump-advisers-soft-holocaust-denial There are plenty of articles to support it. There are examples that can be pulled too. Addressing the arguments that it's more prevalent v. hard denial should also be addressed and added. --KimYunmi (talk) 14:18, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Verb tense

"Zündel had a website, web-mastered by his wife Ingrid, which publicizes his viewpoints." (Emphasis added.) Presumably the verbs should either both be past tense or both be present tense. Also, I think the commas could be removed from "The key claims, which cause Holocaust denial to differ from established fact, are:". -sche (talk) 20:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Hob Gadling (talk) 05:33, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]