Talk:Holocaust uniqueness debate

	Judaism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

European history Low‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Holocaust uniqueness debate appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 4 May 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that some have considered the Holocaust a unique event, external to history and beyond human understanding?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2022/May. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Holocaust uniqueness debate.

Wikipedia

It is requested that an image or photograph of Holocaust uniqueness debate be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.

Wikipedians in Israel may be able to help!

The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Did you know nomination

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)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that some have considered the Holocaust a unique event, external to history and beyond human understanding?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Alberto Heredia (sculptor)

Created by Buidhe (talk). Self-nominated at 04:51, 11 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

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)[reply]
- 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)[reply]
  - OK. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:57, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Original research

The difference is that Lim is specifically discussing the issue of Holocaust uniqueness, while the second source you are citing is not. So, I think it would violate WP:NOR to include it. A more popular exponent of this view is Steven T. Katz, and there are indeed sources discussing his view in relation to Holocaust uniqueness, although I'm unsure about WP:DUE. (t · c) buidhe 06:06, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The paragraph starting with "Others argue that the term "genocide" cannot be used for all instances of mass killings..." is also concerning. There are various definitions of genocide and the most widely used one (Genocide Convention) is not applicable to "all mass killings", but neither is it restricted to the holocaust. Various alternatives to the genocide concept have been proposed, but it's not clear what that has to do with the Holocaust uniqueness debate. (t · c) buidhe 02:57, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UNDUE issues

This is a topic that has been covered by multiple overview sources, which should be the basis of the article. Specific scholars stating "I think the Holocaust is unique" is not very informative, especially when you pick ones that are not noteworthy or influential. (t · c) buidhe 14:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]