Difference between revisions of "Talk:Holocaust"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
AppliedFaith (talk | contribs) (Reverts) |
(Reword denial & record-keeping) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
You can revert back to the biased version if you insist, but you could at least have kept the correct spelling of "occurrence". [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 16:13, 13 April 2007 (EDT) | You can revert back to the biased version if you insist, but you could at least have kept the correct spelling of "occurrence". [[User:AppliedFaith|AppliedFaith]] 16:13, 13 April 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Evidence == | ||
| + | I think (from a pedantic view of English grammar) that there is a small contradiction between the wording that the number of those killed is an estimate because incomplete records have been recovered and the fact the holocaust denial is unjustified because the Germans kept accurate records. Perhaps someone could reword this. [[User:Erasmus|Erasmus]] 16:44, 2 May 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 20:44, May 2, 2007
The "Criticism" section could be a major black eye if it's not carefully watched. --John 22:52, 7 March 2007 (EST)
Reverts
You can revert back to the biased version if you insist, but you could at least have kept the correct spelling of "occurrence". AppliedFaith 16:13, 13 April 2007 (EDT)
Evidence
I think (from a pedantic view of English grammar) that there is a small contradiction between the wording that the number of those killed is an estimate because incomplete records have been recovered and the fact the holocaust denial is unjustified because the Germans kept accurate records. Perhaps someone could reword this. Erasmus 16:44, 2 May 2007 (EDT)