Deletion of Holocaust revising

Comment: Because the "article" uses material combined to imply that these are examples of a "term" which has no use and meaning by historians who in the natural progression of time, through research, have made revisions to certain estimates; the conclusion that the authors/historians are doing this work under the mantle of the "term" used is 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: this discussion ought to be closed per 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: Reeks of , figures and exact details can vary source to source but "holocaust revising" doesn't seem to be a real phenomenon, at least not a notable one.  The "evolving views" Nick mentions above would be better handled in the main article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYN)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:NOR)