Template:Did you know nominations/Holocaust uniqueness debate
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by 97198 (talk) 04:35, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Holocaust uniqueness debate
- ... that some have considered the Holocaust a unique event, external to history and beyond human understanding?
Created by Buidhe (talk). Self-nominated at 04:51, 11 April 2022 (UTC).
Article is new enough and long enough. I can't verify the majority of the things, but these I can read seem to check out. Nothing suggesting plagiarism or copyvio. Hoom seems interesting and is supported in the article although I kind of have to wonder if any of the sources says "some consider the Holocaust" rather than being examples of someone saying that it was unique. QPQ is OK. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:59, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- With the possible exception of Bomholt Nielsen, they're all secondary sources explicitly discussing the uniqueness debate itself and none of the cites are about the author's own view. Blatman is against it, I think Rosenfeld endorses it partly but his presentation on the debate is very evenhanded in my view. (t · c) buidhe 09:25, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- OK. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:57, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- With the possible exception of Bomholt Nielsen, they're all secondary sources explicitly discussing the uniqueness debate itself and none of the cites are about the author's own view. Blatman is against it, I think Rosenfeld endorses it partly but his presentation on the debate is very evenhanded in my view. (t · c) buidhe 09:25, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
