Regarding the writer at httpenwikipediaorgwikiTalkHitlersalute     Mr Barlow is a nutter with an obsession The history of the salute is now improved in the Roman salute article which had many previous visits from Dr Curry in the past  see its talk page The pact between the National Socialist German Workers Party and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is not well known and is also not covered widely on Wikipedia so it is covered up by people and also people often refer to it as the NaziSoviet pact as the writer above does which avoids ever using the actual name of the horrid Party the National Socialist German Workers Party and reinforces the hackneyed use of the shorthand Nazi and the myth that members of the National Socialist German Workers Party referred to themselves as Nazis they did not refer to themselves as Nazis  Some people note the writer above try to evade the point with odd comments such as It wasnt invented by Wikipedia editors to conceal the word socialism  That comment does not dispute the fact that there are people who use the word Nazi to avoid ever stating the actual name of the party The National Socialist German Workers Party Not only is that done in the title of the page cited the NaziSoviet pact page it is done on that entire article where the actual name of the Party never appears nor even the phrase National Socialist The writer above also makes constant use of the shorthand Nazi even when discussing the very topic at hand  The Bellamy salute was not originally the same as the salute of the National Socialist German Workers Party as noted by Professor Curry However as anyone who looks at Dr Currys historic photographs of the salute can see it developed into the same salute as that of the National Socialist German Workers Party Even the writer above concedes Dr Currys point that the flag was saluted with a normal militarystyle salute and then the arm was straightened out toward the flag during the oath The writer above tellingly evades the point that the use of the military salute led to the change in the salute to the US flag  It is as if the writer above is conceding the point made Indeed the writer seems to concede it with the comment Anyway even if the gesture had been the same so what Its just a gesture The Soviets used conventional salutes does that mean that the US military are Communists because they use the same gesture as the Soviet military   It is fascinating how the writer again avoids the actual name Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and also used the term Communist instead of using the term Socialist  The writer then attempts to avoid the issue which is the origin of the straightarm salute and tries to turn the issue into an odd argument about whether the salutes dictated particular dogmas  Nevertheless the writer evades the topic that Professor Curry has raised which is that Francis Bellamy and Edward Bellamy were  selfproclaimed National Socialists in the USA three decades before the National Socialist German Workers Party and Edwards book was an international bestseller translated into every major language including German which Edward spoke and wrote and where Edward had studied as a young man and that Edwards dogma inspired Nationalism clubs worldwide including in Germany       Yes the Roman salute page did once contain innaccuracies and the writer above is to be thanked for conceding that point But that is no reason for the writer to start going on with his use of the term conspiracy Its just what you get when you have an open encyclopedia The point is to correct error when you see it and to not delete those corrections when they are made by people like Dr Curry        The writer above also concedes that he is the Wikipedia editor who became wiser by incorporating Professor Currys discoveries  The writer is to be thanked for crediting Dr Curry with making it more widely available It should be noted that the valuable information that Professor Curry provides is his own discovery  Dr Curry has also mentioned that the material about the use of the Roman salute in films derives from an academic article by Martin Winkler Professor Curry pointed out that Martin Winkler did not realize at the time of Winklers article that the films were all predated by the use of the salute in the US Pledge of Allegiance  Dr Curry has also publicly challenged Martin Winkler to debate these issues  Professor Currys discovery that the swastikahakenkreuz although an ancient symbol was sometimes used by the National Socialist German Workers Party as S shapes standing for its Socialism is also his own original work And he is right that other writers have deliberately covered up the discovery as the writer above admits and have excluded it from the Swastika article  The writer above simply made up his denial and he knows that Dr Curry is correct and he shows it because he does not dispute a word of it and can give no opposing citations or reference  Even when the writer above claimes The real reasons why the Nazis chose the swastika are well documented he cannot provide an citation because he knows that it would either concede or at least not dispute Dr Currys discoveries