Talk:Arthur Butz

Admonition against advertising

In the spirit of wikipedia's popular admonition against advertising, I would suggest that in the future we refrain from installing links not directly associated with the subject of an article into the article-proper (e.g. Never Again Campaign links into this article).

whoa, what a face

geez, check out the pic on the guy's home page. Gzuckier 19:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

This article should at least research the recent story about the inaccurate translation of the Iranian president's remarks. RE: Butz - read his stuff, he's one smart punim.

I removed this part (Ahmadinejad had called for Israel to be "wiped off the map") because it simply is NOT TRUE. Ahmadinejad never said this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.70.4.172 (talk) 00:33, August 21, 2007 (UTC)

Al-Jazeera seems to think he did. ornis (t) 01:08, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Arthur Butz ethnicity

Per MOSBIO, "Ethnicity should generally not be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability". If Butz is indeed Jewish, that is incredibly relevant to his notability as a Holocaust revisionist, but I doubt the claim. If the claim can be verified, however, it should be allowed to remain. johnpseudo 15:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

The surname Butz is originally Austrian. People who share his interests and have a Germanic surname are much more likely to be ethnically German than ethnically Jewish. Sesquivalent (talk) 20:21, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Lipstadt 1994 book says Butz is of German and Italian ancestry but that not much else is known about him beyond his academic history. I don't remember whether Butz is solely a denialist or also interested in exculpating the Axis powers, but will look into this for an upcoming revision of the article. Sesquivalent (talk) 21:21, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Tenure

Butz is listed as an associate professor and tenured. Are associates tenured, just curious.159.105.80.141 14:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Generally, yes. They are at least tenure track. But, academic standards generally establish his right to free speech as long as it is not somehow impacting his duties or criminal. Since he doesn't preach revisionism in the classes that he does teach, there is really nothing to nail him on. 75.3.227.236 (talk) 05:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

"Figures" claim

The article claims that Butz sustains his revisionist work with a large amount of figures. I don't quite see what is remarkable in this fact. Raul Hilberg sustains his historiographic work with a lot of figures too, most if not all of them in complete contradiction with Butz's. A researcher, be it a crank or a serious person, will always employ figures, and the larger the amount, the better for his thesis, be it true or a lie. --RCS (talk) 11:19, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I removed the paragraph altogether. Diff. --RCS (talk) 11:21, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

• See also this regarding Trojancowboy's actions, which I have reverted. WilliamH (talk) 11:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
  • I see.--RCS (talk) 12:20, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

butz algorithm

what is butz alogrithm ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shiftadot (talk • contribs) 16:59, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Since "Butz algorithm" is not mentioned in the article whatsoever, I fail to see how he can be "notable" for it, and I'm removing it from the table. This is not what Arthur Butz is known for. If someone wants to add a section on his algorithm to the article, then I think we can add it back if it is indeed verified as being something he's known for. HorseloverFat (talk) 04:44, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

That is not the sort of thing you could see on Fox News. It is about a very specific domain of science. Try to Google it and you'll find 380 references for "Butz algorithm" like citations in scientific publications such as "A new algorithm for N-dimensional Hilbert scanning." "There are several algorithms for N-dimensional Hilbert scanning, such as the Butz algorithm and the Quinqueton algorithm. The Butz algorithm is a mapping function using several bit operations such as shifting, exclusive OR, etc." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18267509. There are 11 related records in PubMed. You know, it is not so common to have his name associated to a particular Mathematical tool. It should be enough for mentioning that invention on Butz 's credit unless you are against anything positive coming from that guy.Zrigla (talk) 20:02, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Tenure Controversy

This line is in the article:

"Some have argued that he was not fired because of academic freedom granted to tenured professors.[dubious – discuss][3]"

From a review of the book mentioned at the reference [1] it appears that the book is on the general subject of tenure. It seems to me that the line should be deleted as being potentially libelous and not properly sourced.Trojancowboy (talk) 16:51, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

A quick search of Amazon's "Look inside" feature shows reference to Arthur Butz's tenure on page 33.

You need to get a Wikipedia account so that you can sign your entries. The book mentioned argues that tenure should be abolished to improve college education. Tenure is designed to prevent good professors from being fired because of unpopular political positions. Butz has never been accused of being incompetent in his field. The Butz algorithm in computer science has been named after him 35 years ago. This is a rare honor given to a very small fraction of electrical engineering professors. Butz is still an Associate Professor. He has not been promoted solely because of his political beliefs. This is a rare example of tenure doing what it is supposed to do.Trojancowboy (talk) 17:16, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

If you need a wikipedia account, why doesn't wikipedia say so? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.155.120.157 (talk) 23:51, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Not a work which could refute the But'z book?

In Wikipedia I noticed that the norm is not to refer directly to deniers' works, Such rule is particularly respected on the French pages. Butz doesn't even exist in Wikipedia for a French. Generally, external links drive exclusively towards anti-denial works. I wonder why there is no link of that sort here in order to check something which refutes "The Hoax of the Twentieth Century" written in 1976. Any tip?Zrigla (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:16, 18 May 2012 (UTC).

Regarding the first phrase describing his person.

Prior to my edit the first sentence of the article was as follows: "Arthur R. Butz is a Holocaust-denier, associate professor of electrical engineering at Northwestern University, and author (...)". This struck me as rather unprofessional when i first read it.

I find it problematic to list a person's (historical) viewpoints before their degrees and current occupation. Even if he's actively promoting a Holocaust-denying stance, the placement and use of a noun seems like an attempt to discredit his person; not neutral information.

It would be comparable to starting the article on David Duke as "David Duke is a racist, former Grand Wizard of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, activist and writer, and former Republican Louisiana State Representative." While Mr. Duke undoubtedly expresses racist views, one would never word it that way.

I have moved the statement further back within the first sentence, which should be sufficient, unless somebody has an axe to grind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MSUGRA (talk • contribs) 00:05, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Truther111 edit war

Truther111 seems to have gone on a campaign to delete most of this page on the basis of Butz being "famous solely for his holocaust denial". This is simply not true. Most of Butz's notoriety is due to his combination of Northwestern tenure and holocaust denial. But his contributions to science are also notable, and are of course an important part of his personal story. johnpseudo 11:00, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Arthur Butz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070310121248/http://media.www.dailynorthwestern.com/media/storage/paper853/news/2006/02/14/Forum/Iran-Has.The.U.s.s.Number-1920928.shtml?norewrite200608091532&sourcedomain=www.dailynorthwestern.com to http://www.ece.northwestern.edu/~butz/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:46, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

remove Debunking section as redundant?

The Debunking section of article seems pointless. Holocaust denial is debunked both as a whole, and with reference to particular arguments that various deniers may use, but generally there is no individual rebuttal to specific deniers outside of court cases involving them. If Butz' supporters claim he did not get a personal rebuttal that is meaningless and not noteworthy. The general article on Holocaust denial has links to Nizkor etc and other material on debunkings, there is no need to enter into it here. Sesquivalent (talk) 03:21, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

It should stay. People who look for that specific information - Butz said x, I want to know why that is wrong - will appreciate it. It's not like that tiny section takes too much space. In articles about evolution deniers and climate change deniers, such sections are welcome too, although those subjects are also debunked as a whole. --Hob Gadling (talk) 05:40, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

I should have expressed the question better. The problem is not a Debunking section that links to some resources ("see X, Y, Z for refutations of Holocaust denial, both in general and including Butz' arguments"), but the current paragraph presented as a back and forth between Butz supporters and the ADL. It is written not as a refutation of Butz per se but of the claim that nobody had answered him, or some implied idea that unlike other deniers he had a stronger case or something. An all-purpose link to sites like Nizkor could be useful but playing along with the idea of a debate is not. As with other denial-related articles some of the text here is a residue of earlier tendentious edits and counter-edits that fixed particular points but kept the structure. Sesquivalent (talk) 06:37, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Ah. Yes, I see. I retract my statement. --Hob Gadling (talk) 08:13, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

@Sesquivalent: good catch, go ahead. Doug Weller talk 11:11, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Lipstadt's book has a chapter on Butz, I will add some information from there over the next week or two and rewrite the section. Sesquivalent (talk) 21:17, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Let us elaborate this section, as per Sesquivalent's ideas. I am not competent to do so, alas.

Zezen (talk) 10:38, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder. I will try to get to it but not sure how long it might take to go through the relevant chapter of Lipstadt's book. Sesquivalent (talk) 08:52, 31 May 2021 (UTC)