Talk:Fredrick Töben

Bias?

Yeah, there's mega-bias in the article. Here's why:

(1) Regarding the below, here are the facts. Toben is German-born. Toben lives in Australia. Toben has been convicted in Germany of the charge listed. (Note this is not a matter of whether he actually did it; it's a matter of what he was charged with and whether he was found guilty -- he was.) Finally, Toben is a Holocaust denier given the definition set out in Irving v. Lipstadt.

(2) The "Views" section is not tempered with either counterpoints or modulating statements that, e.g., "This is what Toben believes," etc. Rather, it flatly states that belief in the Holocaust is a belief in a conspiracy theory. THIS IS BIAS!

(3) The article states that Raul Hilberg (note correct spelling!) admitted a well-known fact under oath. Hilberg had written as much in 1961, almost thirty years before Canada v. Zundel.

Those edits, by the way, come from Adelaide. So just who do you think made them, eh?

206.16.237.13 (talk) 21:46, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Although I agree that denial of the holocaust is denial of one of the most important events of the 20th century, the opening quote: "German-born Holocaust denier who lives in Australia and who has been convicted in Germany of inciting racial hatred" definitely adds negative bias to this article. In the view of freedom of speech, people such as this holocaust denier should not be forced to believe in certain events in history, science, philosophy, etc. In addition, they should not be charged viewed with a negative attitude by those opposing their views. If it happens that these "deniers" or "non-believers" are being hated, cannot it also be said that the haters are also committing "hatecrime"? (though it may not be on the level relative to that of the "deniers". (Now a piece of my own opinion: As an editor of wikipedia, I am finding many biographical articles and people being branded as "anti-semite", "anti-Jewish", or "anti-zionists". While I believe in the hope of decreasing racism in the world, the steps that these editors have taken in their "racist" labeling can be seen as over-excessive. From my experience (pardon me for original research), these steps often create an anti-Jewish or anti-Israel sentiment.)Count de Chagny 00:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

• Why is there no mention of Holocaust Denial or Revisionism in this article? I refer you to the Adelaide Institute entry. 71.192.178.26 06:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

this man sits in prison, this article should at least reflect some of his points of reasoning so we can understand where he is coming from. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.177.10.53 (talk) 06:49, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

History should not fear examination

Why is holocaust denial such a crime? Surely Nazis are entitled to their opinions. There are no shortage of Nazi sympathisers Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Bush family (Google "Prescott Bush"). Millions of Africans were murdered by Europeans and Americans, genocide has been allowed to happen on numerous occasions since WW2. As many as a million Iraqis have been killed in the last 20 years many of whom had little choice in the matter. None of these "holocaust deniers" insight violence or further killing. I have many questions regarding the holocaust, I am not evil, I would like to know what happened before I was born. I don't like one sided history (often written by the victors), everyone is biased. The numbers killed at Auschwitz was quietly revised down from 4 million to 1.1 million (the plaque was even changed), I'd like this explained. I also wonder about the laws of physics, statistics and logistics. Should I be arrested for these thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.194.65.222 (talk) 17:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia, not a forum for debate. You won't find any/much discussion on that subject here. BOMBkangaroo (talk) 16:28, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

cited sources

I came to this article to put in a bit about 1st October 2008 and Toben's detention in the UK. Because this is a biography article about a living person I think that the following references should be replaced with what are considered reliable sources:

• Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial in the Iranian Media,Special dispatch No. 855, Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) 28 January 2005 -- The Wikipedia article Middle East Media Research Institute says "When founded in 1998, MEMRI's staff of seven included three who had formerly served in Military Intelligence in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF)". It would be better if main stream news paper or a peer reviewed journal can be used for this information (WP:SOURCES).
• Mike Jeffries, Sydney Radio Interview , 13 April 13, 1999 -- This transcript is held on David Irving's website. I would point you to what Richard J. Evans said about Irving "Not one of [Irving's] books, speeches or articles, not one paragraph, not one sentence in any of them, can be taken on trust as an accurate representation of its historical subject. All of them are completely worthless as history, because Irving cannot be trusted anywhere, in any of them, to give a reliable account of what he is talking or writing about. ... if we mean by historian someone who is concerned to discover the truth about the past, and to give as accurate a representation of it as possible, then Irving is not a historian."(Holocaust Denial On Trial).
• USA/Canada: The Crucifixion of Ernst Zündel, Adelaide Institute, Newsletter 186, March 2003. This is Toben's own website and should be avoided see WP:SPS
• i disagree: see "Using self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves" WP:SPS. adelaide has toben's self-published words, cited here to show what he personally claims. so this meets standards for self-published sources, "especially in articles about themselves." Kiphinton (talk) 08:20, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  

As I am not a regular contributor to this page, I am not going to do the donkey work to find other sources and as they are all marginal and not clearly unreliable, I will not flag them as such, but I hope a regular contributor to this page can find better sources to cover the facts that these citations currently cover.--Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 09:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Heres a source with info on court dates --> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7652274.stm hope that helps. ^{(Hypnosadist)} 22:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Nationality

His nationality is not in the article, and this is very important —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.31.220.27 (talk) 20:35, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:TBR42.jpg

The image Image:TBR42.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --03:32, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

link 4

link 4 which has been used to support this ..."Töben has frequently been called a Holocaust denier" looks to me like it fails to meet wikipedia reliable source. It looks more like an online blog and appears to be a charity reporting on anti semetism and requests donations to aid this mission. So it looks like neutrality is an issue. (Off2riorob (talk) 17:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC))

resolved thanks. (Off2riorob (talk) 23:17, 16 May 2009 (UTC))

Revisionist? Bias is evident

"Revisionist works?" And yet; from his, and many other's POV it is considered that claiming the holocaust occurred as jewish and christian history reports is revisionist. Try making such blatant POV statements neutral. Lostinlodos (talk) 08:34, 10 December 2010 (UTC)