User:Ace of Swords/Sandbox
Work in progress for: Joel Hayward, re: controversy over M.A. thesis
Controversy over M.A. thesis
[edit]While working on thesis
[edit]OAS stuff
Embargo
[edit]Thesis was embargoed for several years
Working Party
[edit]Hayward was accused in 2000 of citing the works of (and expressing support for some arguments of) proponents of the Holocaust denial school of historical revisionism in his M.A. thesis.[1]
On 4 April 2000, David Zwartz, the President of the New Zealand Jewish Council (NZJC), wrote a letter to the Rev. Dr Dame Phyllis Guthardt, Chancellor of the University of Canterbury expressing concerns about the university's award of an M.A. degree to Hayward on the basis of his M.A. thesis. NZJC asserted that the thesis promoted anti-Semitism, denied the Holocaust, specifically denied the use of gas chambers during the Holocaust, and caused distress to Jewish community of New Zealand, especially those members who were Holocaust survivors. NZJC perceived that the award of a degree based on thesis was an indication that University of Canterbury supported Holocaust denial, and sought to have the Hayward's M.A. revoked (substituting it with a B.A. (Hons) for it) on the grounds that the university should never have accepted the thesis and had been derelict in applying high academic standards in examining it.[2]
Fudge article
[edit]Other stuff?
[edit]- Academic freedom issues
- Impact on Hayward
- Impact on New Zealand Jewish community
- Use of thesis by Holocaust deniers
Currently in article
[edit]In 2000, at the request of the New Zealand Jewish Council, the University of Canterbury convened a "Working Party" which issued a report admonishing the university for inadequately supervising Hayward's work.[3] The report found that Hayward's thesis was "seriously flawed" but did not "establish dishonesty" on his part.[4] Subsequent to the issuance of the Working Party's report, the university apologized to the New Zealand Jewish community.[5] Hayward later repeatedly repudiated his thesis and apologized for his work, but Holocaust deniers continued to cite the thesis as evidence that they had academic support for their positions.[5] Revisionist historian and Holocaust denier David Irving praised Hayward's work as a "landmark in the turning of the tide in the favour of historical revisionism".[6]
Notes
[edit]- ^ Walsh, Rebecca. (2000-12-22). "A-plus equals anger for Jewish groups." New Zealand Herald. Retrieved on 2007-06-18.
- ^ Joel Hayward Working Party, 2000, pp. 1-2.
- ^ Joel Hayward Working Party, 2000, §5, pp. 64-69.
- ^ Joel Hayward Working Party, 2000, §6.1, p. 70.
- ^ a b Jones, Jeremy. (2000-12-26). "New Zealand school apologizes for Holocaust denial thesis." Jerusalem Post (retrieved from highbeam.com). Retrieved on 2007-06-18.
- ^ Scanlon, Sean. (2000-05-20). "Making history." The Press (Christchurch). Archived at the Nizkor Project. Retrieved on 2007-06-22.
References
[edit]- Joel Hayward Working Party. (2000-12-20). Report to the Council of The University of Canterbury. University of Canterbury.
- Fudge, Thomas A. (2003-05). "The Fate of Joel Hayward in New Zealand Hands: from holocaust historian to holocaust?" History Now 9(2): 12-21. History Department, University of Canterbury. Retrieved through Joel Hayward's Old Website on 2007-06-25. Most copies of the original publication in which this article was published were destroyed. A revised form was published in two parts in the New Zealand Herald, 23-24 July 2003. Also available as an AAARGH reprint (August 2003) at the website of David Irving.
- Hayward, Joel. (2003). "My overview of 'The Canterbury affair.'" Joel Hayward's Old Website. Retrieved on 2007-06-25.
- Hayward, Joel. (2003). "My overview of 'The Canterbury affair'" (continued). Joel Hayward's Old Website. Retrieved on 2007-06-25.
- Hayward, Joel. (2000-09-25). Submission to the University of Canterbury Working Party. Included in three parts on Joel Hayward's Old Website: part 1, part 2, part 3.
- Hayward, Joel. (2000-01-26). Thesis addendum.
[[User:Paukrus] reported by User:Ace of Swords (Result: )
- Three-revert rule violation on
Samashki massacre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Paukrus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Time reported: 23:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- 1st revert: 21:33, 16 August 2007
- 2nd revert: 05:38, 17 August 2007
- 3rd revert: 22:11, 17 August 2007
- 4th revert: 22:50, 17 August 2007
- Diff of 3RR warning: 22:33, 17 August 2007
- Second 3RR warning: 23:05, 17 August 2007
User responded to the first 3RR warning with personal attacks [1] [2].
These reverts are related to this user's repeated placement of the {{NPOV}} tag on the article without explaining either in an edit summary or on the article talk page what his dispute was about, in spite of repeated requests via edit summaries [3] [4] [5], a hidden note at the top of the talk page [6] (which he removed [7]), and requests on his own talk page [8] [9]. There is no issue about him adding the NPOV tag if he explains what his issue is on the article talk page; without such an explanation, there's no point to repeatedly adding the tag unless to disrupt.
User has a same pattern of reverting on Komsomolskoye massacre (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), but finally provided an explanation for his placement of the NPOV tag on that article's talk page, per my repeated request[10].