Jump to content

Talk:The Holocaust

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 86.187.237.124 (talk) at 22:02, 24 January 2023 (→‎Richard of Devizes: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

    Template:Vital article

    Former good articleThe Holocaust was one of the History 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
    DateProcessResult
    March 9, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
    January 19, 2006Good article nomineeListed
    July 5, 2006Good article reassessmentKept
    November 16, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
    May 3, 2007Good article reassessmentDelisted
    June 11, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
    October 3, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
    Current status: Delisted good article

    Possible wrong geographic name in the article.

    There may be an incorrect geographic term in the article. In the section "Invasion of the Soviet Union (22 June 1941)" under the title "Mass shootings" in the 5th paragraph it is written "Einsatzgruppe C in the Ukraine with Army Group South". The term "The Ukraine" is not advised, using "Ukraine" would be better, in fact, it's even advised by the page "Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Ukranian places)" So, if other editors agree that this is a mistake, Someone with editing rights should fix it. 83.178.143.2 (talk) 13:59, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

     Done CJ-Moki (talk) 06:15, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    What's the point of explanatory note [a]?

    I'm not sure I really get what the first explanatory note is trying to do. It seems half of those sources are for establishing that the term "Holocaust" refers specifically to the genocide of Jews (and not e.g. Roma), but that's not really relevant to the sentence it is attached to, which doesn't actually use the term "Holocaust". And it seems the other half of the sources are for establishing due weight for describing the death toll as "some six million", by quoting other sources who do the same. I can kind of get the point of that, though wouldn't it be better to actually explain the context and reasoning behind quoting that figure? For instance, like we do in §Death toll:

    The most commonly cited death toll is the six million given by Adolf Eichmann to SS member Wilhelm Höttl, who signed an affidavit mentioning this figure in 1945.[420][ac] Historians' estimates range from 4,204,000 to 7,000,000.[422] According to Yad Vashem, "[a]ll the serious research" confirms that between five and six million Jews were murdered.[ac]

    To me something along those lines would be more informative, particularly given I'm not entirely sure what the point of the note is at the moment. I guess it's just "yes this is due" source dumps, but is there not a better way to present that? Endwise (talk) 07:31, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Having got no response, I'm going to boldly attempt a fix for the problem mentioned above. Here's what I'll do:

    • Move the quote from Yad Vashem explaining the detail behind the death toll (now [ac]) to the bit about the death toll in the lead, where [a] is now
    • Move [a] to the first sentence, because the point of it is to say basically that "The Holocaust" refers specifically to the genocide of Jewish people. The quote from David Wyman didn't mention the term, so I left that one out, but its otherwise the same.

    Endwise (talk) 03:56, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]


    Holocaust denial publication - an academic journal?

    More eyes needed at the Journal of Historical Review, a holocaust denial publication by the Institute for Historical Review. There is discussion as to whether this should be categorised as an academic journal, and whether we should use the template for academic journals. Cambial foliar❧ 13:41, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    A common misconception has been added to this article

    Well yes the Holocaust was mostly killing Jewish people, there was more to that, the list of “types” of people they killed includes but is not limited to; LQBTQ+, the mentally ill, and disabled along with those deemed “ugly” by societies beauty standards, please correct this to stop any misconception from spreading, especially because this website is meant to educate others and not spread misinformation. Raccoon dude111 (talk) 02:24, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Feel free to read the article and be educated before declaring "misconceptions have been added" - there is an entire section on The Holocaust#Other victims of Nazi persecution. Cannolis (talk) 03:18, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    In his account of the coronation of Richard the Lionheart in 1189, English chronicler Richard of Devizes was the first person to use the word holocaust when he described the mass murder of the Jews of London, although the use of this word simply refers to a " whole (holos) burnt (kaustos)" sacrificial offering to a god.[1] 86.187.237.124 (talk) 22:02, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    1. ^ Whitney, William Dwight, ed. (1904). "Holocaust". The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia. Vol. 4. p. 2859. Retrieved 2016-06-01.