I think that this template is already a POV nightmare and is wide open to be an abuse of WP:BLP. --PBS (talk) 19:57, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-04-09T19:57:00.000Z","author":"Philip Baird Shearer","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Philip_Baird_Shearer-2009-04-09T19:57:00.000Z-delete_this_template","replies":["c-Miacek-2009-04-09T21:42:00.000Z-Philip_Baird_Shearer-2009-04-09T19:57:00.000Z"],"displayName":"PBS"}}-->
What is the purpose of this template? It looks to me as if it is being used in a biased way to link all sorts of articles together and as a way to bypass the restrictions on WP:BLP "No I am not accusing this person of being a falsifier this template is just a useful navigation aid." --PBS (talk) 09:19, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-04-20T09:19:00.000Z","author":"Philip Baird Shearer","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Philip_Baird_Shearer-2009-04-20T09:19:00.000Z-delete_this_template","replies":["c-Martintg-2009-04-20T23:35:00.000Z-Philip_Baird_Shearer-2009-04-20T09:19:00.000Z","c-Izzedine-2009-05-04T13:27:00.000Z-Philip_Baird_Shearer-2009-04-20T09:19:00.000Z"],"displayName":"PBS"}}-->
Where there is near universal agreement that a genocide occurred, genocide denial is usually considered a form of illegitimate historical revisionism. However, in circumstances where the event in dispute is not seen to constitute genocide by the majority of scholars, the use of the term may be an ad hominem by those who argue that a genocide occurred.
Should samizdat and tamizdat be mentioned in this template? On one hand, they're not examples of falsification of history; on another, the very necessity of these forms of underground publication are causally related to Soviet falsification of history (and many other topics) for ideological purposes. ΔιγουρενΕμπρος! 15:28, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-04-11T15:28:00.000Z","author":"Digwuren","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Digwuren-2009-04-11T15:28:00.000Z-Samizdat_and_tamizdat","replies":[],"displayName":"\u0394\u03b9\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b5\u03bd"}}-->
I am not quite sure what was the reason for deletion of these links. Indeed, most of the Soviet historiography served exclusively for the purpose of Soviet propaganda, and as such is no different from the Lysenkoism. Let's keep it there.Biophys (talk) 03:25, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-05-15T03:25:00.000Z","author":"Biophys","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Biophys-2009-05-15T03:25:00.000Z-Links","replies":["c-Digwuren-2009-05-15T06:15:00.000Z-Biophys-2009-05-15T03:25:00.000Z"]}}-->
From the history of the page
--PBS (talk) 20:07, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-07-09T20:07:00.000Z","author":"Philip Baird Shearer","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Philip_Baird_Shearer-2009-07-09T20:07:00.000Z-Falsification_of_history_is_not_Historical_revisionism","replies":[],"displayName":"PBS"}}-->
I still think that this template should be deleted. --PBS (talk) 20:08, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2009-07-09T20:08:00.000Z","author":"Philip Baird Shearer","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Philip_Baird_Shearer-2009-07-09T20:08:00.000Z-Falsification_of_history_is_not_Historical_revisionism","replies":[],"displayName":"PBS"}}-->
Properly, falsifiability refers to the fundamental principle that scientific theories shall be possible to disprove. Since most countries passed their first laws against holocaust denial in the 1970s, there was plenty of time to falsify, and yet falsification failed, validating that holocaust really happened. A scientific term shall not be used to describe pseudoscientific bullshit. The whole template should be merged with some genocide denial category. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.58.107.126 (talk) 13:00, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2012-06-27T13:00:00.000Z","author":"109.58.107.126","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-109.58.107.126-2012-06-27T13:00:00.000Z-The_title_abuses_the_term_\"falsification\".","replies":[]}}-->
I don't think Vladimir Žerjavić can reasonably be described as a "revisionist" or a "denier".
Žerjavić's WWII Yugoslav casualty figures have been rather closely matched by Bogoljub Kočović (who seems to be absent from this list), and have since gained mainstream acceptance. Today, it is generally accepted that Yugoslav WWII casualties were significantly lower than 1.7 million, and - in particular - that much fewer than 700,000 have been killed in Jasenovac.
Apart from that, while a typical revisionist invariably has a political agenda, I'm not aware of any such topics in Žerjavić's works - he was a demographer, and as far as I can tell, his published works generally stick to demographics, without delving into politics or ideology.
I'm not sure what's the criterion for this list, but I don't think simply putting there everyone who has ever been called a "denier" is acceptable. GregorB (talk) 13:14, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2015-12-07T13:14:00.000Z","author":"GregorB","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-GregorB-2015-12-07T13:14:00.000Z-Removed_Vladimir_\u017derjavi\u0107","replies":["c-Buidhe-2020-11-15T21:01:00.000Z-GregorB-2015-12-07T13:14:00.000Z"]}}-->
Look up and you'll see GregorB, PBS, and others raising issues with the issues of classifying people in the template, while on the other side is just one editor: yours truly. (t · c) buidhe 22:38, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2020-11-15T22:38:00.000Z","author":"Buidhe","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Buidhe-2020-11-15T22:38:00.000Z-Removed_Vladimir_\u017derjavi\u0107","replies":["c-GregorB-2020-11-15T23:07:00.000Z-Buidhe-2020-11-15T22:38:00.000Z"]}}-->
The following discussion 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.
Should this template include a list of "proponents"? Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:10, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"2020-11-15T23:10:00.000Z","author":"Beyond My Ken","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Beyond_My_Ken-2020-11-15T23:10:00.000Z-RfC:_Should_this_template_include_a_list_of_names?","replies":["c-Beyond_My_Ken-2020-11-15T23:10:00.000Z-Beyond_My_Ken-2020-11-15T23:10:00.000Z","c-Beyond_My_Ken-2020-11-15T23:15:00.000Z-Beyond_My_Ken-2020-11-15T23:10:00.000Z","c-Buidhe-2020-11-15T23:34:00.000Z-Beyond_My_Ken-2020-11-15T23:10:00.000Z","c-Bilorv-2020-11-16T02:54:00.000Z-Beyond_My_Ken-2020-11-15T23:10:00.000Z","c-Eggishorn-2020-11-16T20:04:00.000Z-Beyond_My_Ken-2020-11-15T23:10:00.000Z","c-JPxG-2020-11-20T11:07:00.000Z-Beyond_My_Ken-2020-11-15T23:10:00.000Z","c-Eggishorn-2020-11-21T19:03:00.000Z-Beyond_My_Ken-2020-11-15T23:10:00.000Z","c-PBS-2020-11-25T12:01:00.000Z-Beyond_My_Ken-2020-11-15T23:10:00.000Z","c-GregorB-2020-11-28T21:04:00.000Z-Beyond_My_Ken-2020-11-15T23:10:00.000Z"]}}-->
Ah, yes, I'm just overall in favor of saying that things didn't happen -- no, I don't have a specific objection to any one thing, I just think that when people say something happened, it's good to say that it didn't
Regarding a recent attempted move of Nakba Denial from "Other manifestations" to Genocide/Mass Killings denial.
Neither the Nakba denial or Nakba articles center on genocide or mass killings (let alone denial of). Asking for justification and clear citation before a subsequent move is attempted again. Thanks.
Mistamystery (talk) 17:11, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]__DTELLIPSISBUTTON__{"threadItem":{"timestamp":"20231109171100","author":"Mistamystery","type":"comment","level":1,"id":"c-Mistamystery-20231109171100-Nakba_Denial_move","replies":["c-XTheBedrockX-20231109200600-Mistamystery-20231109171100"]}}-->
Lokasi Pengunjung: 3.17.78.11