Research Article: Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust

User avatar
boredbird
Sucks Mod
Posts: 510
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 3:24 am
Has thanked: 650 times
Been thanked: 297 times

Re: Research Article: Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust

Post by boredbird » Fri Feb 17, 2023 3:56 am

I think the most interesting part is Piotrus' advocacy of students using Wikipedia articles instead of academic sources while he is busy suppressing those sources in favor of his own Wikienforced opinions.

Don't listen to historians i am expert at communicator!!! I am the reliable source!

And the fact that WMF promoted this.

SkepticalHistorian
Sucks Fan
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon May 10, 2021 4:00 pm
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 26 times

Re: Research Article: Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust

Post by SkepticalHistorian » Sat Feb 18, 2023 4:33 pm

It’s an inquisition into “reliable sources.” A cabel of editors got together off-wiki and bullied their POV into the article. I’m not sure what tipped the Revisionists off, maybe the phony, impractical gas chamber at the Warsaw Concentration camp article.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_co ... camp_story

Here’s another phony-looking thing, allegedly a “bone crushing machine” in another concentration camp. Picture taken by a Soviet “Extraordinary State Commission”, which was notorious for introducing phony evidence at the Nuremberg trials blaming Germany for the murder of Polish soldiers at Katyan forest.

EFC7EEC9-3972-47F4-951C-FE74686D13C9.png
File:Members of a Sonderkommando 1005 unit pose next to a bone crushing machine in the Janowska concentration camp.png
EFC7EEC9-3972-47F4-951C-FE74686D13C9.png (158.62 KiB) Viewed 886 times

The photograph was originally described as sondokommander soldiers posing with a bone crushing machine but was later agreed that it was taken after the war.

Discussion at the photo-file page:
phony picture ?

I challenge the veracity of the decription of this photo. Just a cursory look at the clothing and boots makes clear that this photo is not a photo of Sonderkommando - certainly NOT during the war! The prisoners wore striped prisoner outfits and DID NOT have nice boots! 216.153.214.89 (talk) 01:58, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

That's correct, the picture has been taken after the liberation of the camp. We can see former members of the Sonderkommando posing on the machine. This photo has been taken by the Extraordinary State Commission in 1944. See this German article for further information:
http://de.scribd.com/doc/142343490/Ludw ... on-Lemberg --95.118.199.154 14:21, 18 August 2013‎

There are two more photos, a second one here and a third one here. It's universally agreed the third one is dated to August 1944. I agree that dating the first two photos to a summer 1943 date is problematic for a variety of reasons, including the fact that the machine appears to be in the same condition in all the photos and that condition is immobile. Given the claim of another Sonderkommando 1005 member that their work was distributed between two sites a few miles apart, if the photo was taken while the machine was in use why isn't it mobile? If all three photos were taken after the Red Army had recaptured the area, the damage can be readily explained as war damage. The front was hundreds of miles from Lwów throughout 1943. But if the photo was actually taken in August 1944, then the photo would not have been found in the possession of an accused SS officer, and the use of this photo in the trial of that accused is questionable. If false testimony about the origin of the photo could be given in one case, it raises the possibility that use of the photo to make a general case is also questionable. Keep in mind that an inquiry by this same Soviet commission into Katyn falsely accused the Germans of responsibility for that massacre.--Brian Dell (talk) 01:21, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... n_camp.png
The article about the camp says the Germans took over a factory nearby that made milling machines, maybe the machine came from there?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janowska_ ... ation_camp

Here’s a long article from “Inconvenient History” about the bone crushing machine, which explains it as atrocity propaganda, like the human soap myth. Not a “reliable source” or acceptable POV.
http://www.inconvenienthistory.com/5/3/3220

Soap myth: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soap_made ... an_corpses

User avatar
wexter
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 574
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2020 4:18 pm
Has thanked: 274 times
Been thanked: 281 times

Re: Research Article: Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust

Post by wexter » Sun Feb 19, 2023 3:06 am

All the culpable editors are claiming that "the allegations come from off-wiki" so no harm no foul. The worst offenders are carrying on as usual.

They are so fucking stupid they don't realize that "off-wiki" findings are both more meaningful and more serious than anything that occurs on the platform.

They are all waiting to be proved innocent in a Wikipedia monkey trial; that they know may never come because the process is dysfunctional.

The arbitration process and the WMF are totally incapable of managing disinformation, bias, and narrative framing. This is beyond embarrassing and any credible institution would address this problem with time being of the essence.

The failure covers some very sensitive topics much wider than the scope of the arbitration. There are at least 50-100+ related topics that need to be examined and 1000's of articles. The articles being manipulated even touch upon Canada! eg Ukrainian Nazi Monuments in Canada"


There is absolutely no control over content - it is a total shit show - and the process is a worse shit show.

Individual editors named in the research paper are so fucking stupid they don't realize they need to "lay low" and restrict their own editing.

The press will eventually pick up on this shit show.

I would say that it will all blow over; but with a recent change in technology the replacement for Wikipedia is waiting in the wings. (some sort of AI product).
Wikipedia - "Barely competent and paranoid. There’s a hell of a combination."

User avatar
boredbird
Sucks Mod
Posts: 510
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2017 3:24 am
Has thanked: 650 times
Been thanked: 297 times

Re: Research Article: Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust

Post by boredbird » Sun Feb 19, 2023 5:35 am

SkepticalHistorian wrote:
Sat Feb 18, 2023 4:33 pm
I’m not sure what tipped the Revisionists off, maybe the phony, impractical gas chamber at the Warsaw Concentration camp article.
You're getting this backwards.

User avatar
Ognistysztorm
Sucks Critic
Posts: 375
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2022 1:39 am
Has thanked: 68 times
Been thanked: 199 times

Re: Research Article: Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust

Post by Ognistysztorm » Sun Feb 19, 2023 5:37 am

wexter wrote:
Sun Feb 19, 2023 3:06 am
All the culpable editors are claiming that "the allegations come from off-wiki" so no harm no foul. The worst offenders are carrying on as usual.

They are so fucking stupid they don't realize that "off-wiki" findings are both more meaningful and more serious than anything that occurs on the platform.

They are all waiting to be proved innocent in a Wikipedia monkey trial; that they know may never come because the process is dysfunctional.

The arbitration process and the WMF are totally incapable of managing disinformation, bias, and narrative framing. This is beyond embarrassing and any credible institution would address this problem with time being of the essence.

The failure covers some very sensitive topics much wider than the scope of the arbitration. There are at least 50-100+ related topics that need to be examined and 1000's of articles. The articles being manipulated even touch upon Canada! eg Ukrainian Nazi Monuments in Canada"


There is absolutely no control over content - it is a total shit show - and the process is a worse shit show.

Individual editors named in the research paper are so fucking stupid they don't realize they need to "lay low" and restrict their own editing.

The press will eventually pick up on this shit show.

I would say that it will all blow over; but with a recent change in technology the replacement for Wikipedia is waiting in the wings. (some sort of AI product).
Not just "some sort of AI product" like ChatGPT, but also full-on replacements such as Justapedia which from what I heard, has an equivalent of Arbitration Committee of experts deciding on content issues. It's plesantly surprising that the beginning of the end was much faster; I expected that it would only occur a year from now when Jennsaurus publish the story about Oberranks.

User avatar
wexter
Sucks Warrior
Posts: 574
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2020 4:18 pm
Has thanked: 274 times
Been thanked: 281 times

Re: Research Article: Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust

Post by wexter » Sun Feb 19, 2023 2:50 pm

Image
Wikipedia - "Barely competent and paranoid. There’s a hell of a combination."

User avatar
Cla68
Sucks
Posts: 72
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2020 7:18 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 93 times

Re: Research Article: Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust

Post by Cla68 » Sat Mar 04, 2023 7:03 pm

Crossposting this here since this is the appropriate thread:

I understand that this thread isn't meant primarily to discuss the latest Poland history cabal arbitration case, but there is nowhere else for me to say this, and that's that there is something singularly salient about this case.

Judging from the arbitrator comments on the case proposal page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... se#Support ), they have no idea what they're involved with here. Wikipedia administrators, and established users, are so used to being inside their insular Wikipedia bubble, and quickly reverting and banning any IP or new editors who mess with it, that they don't realize when they're overmatched or in over their heads. They don't understand that this issue has already been decided, and Wikipedia and its administration has no say in the decision.

The Holocaust remembrance industry is arguably the most organized, active, and motivated grievance machine in world history. They have good reason for their motivation, as violent antisemitism has been almost a constant throughout history, culminating in the genocide in WWII, and they obviously want to keep it from happening again, among other reasons.

It the participants in that community don't get what they want from this arbitration case, they are going to go after the Wikimedia Foundation, including its officers, and could very well go after the arbitrators. They have the full weight behind them of all Western media, all Western governments, all Western corporate industry, and all popular culture and social media. The WMF and arbitrators don't appear to understand this. The Grabowski essay is a shot across the bow, giving Wikipedia a chance to correct information about the Holocaust that the Holocaust scholars believe is problematic. If Wikipedia doesn't fix it to their satisfaction, the gloves will come off.

If any established Wikipedian or administrator reads this, you need to warn the arbitrators. Personally, I don't have much sympathy for the arbitrators, as I think the people administering one of the biggest websites on the planet deserve some consequences for their ineptness and laziness. However, what may be coming is something I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy.

User avatar
Ognistysztorm
Sucks Critic
Posts: 375
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2022 1:39 am
Has thanked: 68 times
Been thanked: 199 times

Re: Research Article: Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust

Post by Ognistysztorm » Sat Mar 04, 2023 7:45 pm

Cla68 wrote:
Sat Mar 04, 2023 7:03 pm
Crossposting this here since this is the appropriate thread:

I understand that this thread isn't meant primarily to discuss the latest Poland history cabal arbitration case, but there is nowhere else for me to say this, and that's that there is something singularly salient about this case.

Judging from the arbitrator comments on the case proposal page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... se#Support ), they have no idea what they're involved with here. Wikipedia administrators, and established users, are so used to being inside their insular Wikipedia bubble, and quickly reverting and banning any IP or new editors who mess with it, that they don't realize when they're overmatched or in over their heads. They don't understand that this issue has already been decided, and Wikipedia and its administration has no say in the decision.

The Holocaust remembrance industry is arguably the most organized, active, and motivated grievance machine in world history. They have good reason for their motivation, as violent antisemitism has been almost a constant throughout history, culminating in the genocide in WWII, and they obviously want to keep it from happening again, among other reasons.

It the participants in that community don't get what they want from this arbitration case, they are going to go after the Wikimedia Foundation, including its officers, and could very well go after the arbitrators. They have the full weight behind them of all Western media, all Western governments, all Western corporate industry, and all popular culture and social media. The WMF and arbitrators don't appear to understand this. The Grabowski essay is a shot across the bow, giving Wikipedia a chance to correct information about the Holocaust that the Holocaust scholars believe is problematic. If Wikipedia doesn't fix it to their satisfaction, the gloves will come off.

If any established Wikipedian or administrator reads this, you need to warn the arbitrators. Personally, I don't have much sympathy for the arbitrators, as I think the people administering one of the biggest websites on the planet deserve some consequences for their ineptness and laziness. However, what may be coming is something I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy.
Given the past track records of ArbComm and all other "established processes" it's pretty clear that sooner or later Wikipedia will terminally falter, which is something we'd very much nod our head at this point. The next worry then should be on how to persuade and convince editors that didn't get tarnished by the "evil" culture, along with those that never joined, to participate in other encyclopedic platforms instead, for the reason that if they remain and when the real comeuppance happens, they could get lumped together with toxic editors and powertrippers where they get looked upon as cult groups, pyramid scheme enterprises and whatnot. It's going to be like the current backlash against the crypto industry following several high profile scandals, the latest being FTX.

SkepticalHistorian
Sucks Fan
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon May 10, 2021 4:00 pm
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 26 times

Re: Research Article: Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust

Post by SkepticalHistorian » Sun Mar 05, 2023 1:31 am

Grabowski et.al. realize this gas chamber in the Warsaw Concentration camp was phony*, now it’s time for others to point out the absurdity of the other gas chambers.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warsaw_co ... camp_story

61EDBC81-A8FF-4477-BAC3-BEECF44FDF30.png
According to the scheme, a ventilation shaft, which was located closer to the railway station and is seen on the left of the scheme, pumped in air from the outside. In the meantime, hydrogen cyanide gas appearing from Zyklon B was transported by two pipes to the ventilators, where the gas was mixed with air, and then blown into the tunnel via vents in its walls that could be closed. These were the two gas chambers that Trzcińska alleged to have existed. The gas was then pumped out of the gas chambers by the ventilator engines and released in the atmosphere. The scheme says that the Institute of National Remembrance and the Council for the Protection of Struggle and Martyrdom Sites are to blame for the destruction of what is said to be the remnants of the gas chamber infrastructure in 1996.
61EDBC81-A8FF-4477-BAC3-BEECF44FDF30.png (376.93 KiB) Viewed 902 times
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File ... 47134).jpg
Attachments
DBA6F374-0387-41D5-873A-B807CBBAC396.png
DBA6F374-0387-41D5-873A-B807CBBAC396.png (266.04 KiB) Viewed 902 times

User avatar
Cla68
Sucks
Posts: 72
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2020 7:18 pm
Has thanked: 101 times
Been thanked: 93 times

Re: Research Article: Wikipedia’s Intentional Distortion of the History of the Holocaust

Post by Cla68 » Sun Mar 05, 2023 2:01 pm

Over 10 years ago ArbCom declared that their focus would be on behavioral issues of the editors they investigate and they specifically stated that they would not address content issues, such as allegations that editors are misusing sources. The other admins in WP have generally followed their lead. You can understand why, because if admins were expected to use analysis and objective truth to determine if editors were presenting content, including the sourcing, correctly, it would increase the workload and responsibility of WP's admin corps tenfold. They just don't want that level of responsibility.

The thing is, they do need to embrace that level of responsibility. If you're going to claim that your website is an "encyclopedia" then that means the "encyclopedia"'s designated administrators have to ensure that it really does meet that definition. De facto, they're responsible for its content, whether they want it or not. If you're going to volunteer to be an admin, then you're pledging to make sure the content is correct, to the best of your ability.

This Poland and the Holocaust issue is forcing ArbCom, and by extension, all of WP's admins to finally face this reality. ArbCom is going to try to weasel out of it with this case, but they won't be able to. The reason is, if they don't enact measures to fix the content in question, the Holocaust history industry is going to up the pressure and come after them harder. And that industry has a thousand times the resources, support, and motivation that WP's administration has.

If the arbitrators had half a clue about trying to maintain the status quo and preserving limits on their responsibility, they would be saying that there is no way in H-ll that they're going to touch this case, and would be telling the WMF, "This is yours to handle. Get your lawyers involved and take care of it. We're not paid enough to start regulating content and we don't want to and refuse to anyway."
Last edited by Cla68 on Sun Mar 05, 2023 5:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Post Reply