Talk:Yehuda Bauer

message: We would like to get in touch with professor Bauer.
Could you send us his email address?
Thanks,
Mike Ebrani
:Have you tried tracking him down through his university's departmental website? Historian932 (talk) 06:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yehuda Bauer 

message: There has been a dispute about content within The Holocaust's article, particularly regarding whether or not 'slaughter' is an appropriate word to use. I am involved in that dispute and my edits to the Yehuda Bauer article may therefore look like POV pushing. While that may appear true, I am using neutral language and citing the subject of the article; research already done should be put to use where applicable. —Parhamr 09:14, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Full disclosure 

message: I was troubled by the sentence:
"Professor Bauer also believes that people must go to Yad Vashem to learn the right way of understanding the Holocaust."
It makes him sound intellectually totalitarian, perhaps some elaboration is in order? Also the following sentence (which I rewrote) ("Many others believe that complex historical events such as the Holocaust require a multiplicity of perspectives rather than a single orthodoxy, however well intentioned and enlightened it may be.") seems somewhat gratuitous and even mildly latently moralistic but I didn't want to delete it outright (lest I be accused of "censorship"). Historian932 (talk) 06:24, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evidence of insistence on orthodoxy? 

message: About ten years ago  I read an article or a brochure by Bauer on the rescue of most Danish Jews from deportation in Sep. 1943, after they had been warned by a German diplomat, Georg Ferdinand Duckwitz. This episode is correctly reported in the WP article on Duckwitz, himself an early member of the Nazi party. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Ferdinand_Duckwitz
Surprisingly Yehuda Bauer did not mention Duckwitz in his essay or brochure, without whose warning the rescue of the Danish Jews would in all likelihood not have taken place. 
Can anyone help me find this publication and explain to me why Duckwitz´ name was not mentioned?Ontologix (talk) 02:14, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yehuda Bauer´s essay on the rescue of Danish Jews in 1943

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Yehuda Bauer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110617061055/http://www.jerusalem.muni.il/jer_main/TopSiteJeru.asp?newstr=3&src=%2Fjer_sys%2Fpublish%2FHtmlFiles%2F1030%2Fresults_pub_id%3D12594.html&cont=895 to http://www.jerusalem.muni.il/jer_main/TopSiteJeru.asp?newstr=3&src=%2Fjer_sys%2Fpublish%2FHtmlFiles%2F1030%2Fresults_pub_id%3D12594.html&cont=895
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://humanities.ucsc.edu/JewishStudies/docs/YBauerLecture.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Yehuda Bauer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061202210719/http://www.adl.org/education/dimensions_18_1/portrait.asp to http://www.adl.org/education/dimensions_18_1/portrait.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:59, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Yehuda Bauer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120325191332/http://israelcfr.com/documents/6-1/6-1-6-Bauer.pdf to http://www.israelcfr.com/documents/6-1/6-1-6-Bauer.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140825162208/http://www.israelcfr.com/documents/7-3/7-3-7-YehudaBauer.pdf to http://www.israelcfr.com/documents/7-3/7-3-7-YehudaBauer.pdf
*Added  tag to http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1242212366393&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
*Added  tag to http://www.researchchannel.com/prog/displayseries.asp?collid=518
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:34, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "Discussing Denial and Distortion of the Holocaust" 
While the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance attempted to define Holocaust denial and distortion in 2013 (https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/resources/working-definitions-charters/working-definition-holocaust-denial-and-distortion), Bauer points out a gap in the definition: namely, quantification of victims. A huge way in which denial manifests, he argues, is in underestimating Jewish fatalities, thus leading them to "conclude that 'the Jews' exaggerate their losses" (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23739770.2020.1805916). Another key way in which the Holocaust's impact is diminished is by key antisemitic and right-wing intellectuals, who argue that Jews "invented the Holocaust for economic and political gain" (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23739770.2020.1805916). While this claim is widely disputed in much of the 'Western' world, Bauer points out that Holocaust denial is engrained in much of radical Islam. This denial stems from promises by the Germans for liberation from Western dependency and manifests through denial in Islamic media outlets. Bauer points out, through his writing in the Israel Council on Foreign Relations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Council_on_Foreign_Relations), that one form of denial outright denies the Holocaust and the other which supports ideas of destruction, outlined by the Holocaust. Polish denial, Bauer claims, is less focused on the fact that the Holocaust existed (which is commemorated widely in Poland), but is focused on denial of individual Polish responsibility in the Holocaust. Despite this denial, Poles consistently collaborated with villages and leaders alike to arrest and alert Germany of the presence of Jews. As such, Bauer hopes that the definition can be expanded to meet these needs and hopes that in doing so, other countries will take sufficient responsibility for their participation in the Shoah (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23739770.2020.1805916). Mapelviewicecream (talk) 11:52, 6 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 19:17, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please clearly mention/quote the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Please do not reopen this without making new statements.  07:51, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 July 2021 

message: Change this: What the Nazis called the "Final Solution of the Jewish Question" was formalized at the Wannsee Conference on January 20, 1942.
To this: What the Nazis called the "Final Solution of the Jewish Question" is considered to have been formalized at the Wannsee Conference on January 20, 1942, although Bauer has rejected this view, calling it a "silly story".
Cite this 23 Jan 1992 article from Jewish Telegraphic Agency: https://www.jta.org/archive/nazi-scheme-not-born-at-wannsee-israeli-holocaust-scholar-claims
Cite The Canadian Jewish News 30 Jan 1992. The article is screenshotted here as Image 12 and claimed to be from that date, although I don't know if a better confirmation of the date is needed https://phdn.org/archives/holocaust-history.org/wannseeprotocol/index.html
Not sure if Wikipedia's characterization of the conference is at all warranted. From the link above (THHP) - "Since the early 1960s at the latest, historians agree that no decision was taken at Wannsee and in countless books and articles published since, this overrated interpretation of Wannsee is addressed explicitly. [...] Bauer was far from the first scholar who has rejected the "Wannsee decision" - as already said, this was accepted by historians for decades." HonestManBad (talk) 01:47, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 01:54, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Since no one has expressed contrary views in three months (see the section below), you can go ahead with the change. HonestManBad (talk) 09:41, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

text: I look at it the other way. No one saw fit to make the edit, so there is no consensus for the change. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:22, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, if you disagree, the onus is on you to say so. No one has. The point of extended-protected is not that only the opinions of the Wikipedia aristocracy matter. I don't have to convince anyone who's unwilling to engage. There's me versus 3 months of silence: that's all the consensus I need. Besides, all I'm asking for is a well-sourced addition which doesn't contradict previous information: what it presently says is just "X" which precisely means "historians agree that X", so if I change it to "historians agree that X, although Bauer has rejected this", it is only an addition. As for the question of whether historians actually agree on X, although this is dubious, it's not part of the concrete change I've proposed. HonestManBad (talk) 12:51, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

text: This time, please leave it to someone who is willing to either implement the change or state an objection. HonestManBad (talk) 00:00, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

text: (diff) This appears appropriately sourced. It has been attributed to  in the page history as is expected when implementing ERs. I’ve only cited the first source though as the the Canadian Jewish News used the JTA story in syndication. As an aside, both the arguments for silence above seem to be limited by Warnock's dilemma likely suggesting low visibility here. Implementing the requested edit might help bring enough attention to settle any potential concerns. --N8wilson 🔔 03:26, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 20 January 2022 

message: 'What the Nazis called the "Final Solution of the Jewish Question" was formalized at the Wannsee Conference on January 20, 1942.'
This comes just after a passage describing Bauer's view which clashes with this. So... you state "Bauer believes X", then right after that you essentially state "X is false" as an established fact without noting the contradiction. Very strangely written.
I propose that the above sentence be changed to 'What the Nazis called the "Final Solution of the Jewish Question" is considered to have been formalized at the Wannsee Conference on January 20, 1942, although Bauer has rejected this view, calling it a "silly story".'
Cite this 23 Jan 1992 article from Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Cite The Canadian Jewish News 30 Jan 1992. The article is screenshotted here by The Holocaust History Project (THHP) as Image 12 and claimed to be from that date.
I'm not sure if Wikipedia's characterization of the conference is at all warranted. From the THHP link above - "Since the early 1960s at the latest, historians agree that no decision was taken at Wannsee and in countless books and articles published since, this overrated interpretation of Wannsee is addressed explicitly. [...] Bauer was far from the first scholar who has rejected the "Wannsee decision" - as already said, this was accepted by historians for decades." HonestManBad (talk) 10:59, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Wannsee Conference and Bauer's views 

message: Where does Himmler states his rejection of "the Bolshevik method of physical annihilation of a people out of inner conviction as un-German and impossible,"? He is not rejecting anything, he says he prefers emigration IF they decide not to physically exterminate them. "Cruel and tragic as every individual case may be, this method (emigration) is still the mildest and best one if, out of inner conviction, one rejects as un-German and impossible the Bolshevist method of physical extermination of a people."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:CA8:A15:12BA:4AB:9488:349E:145D (talk) 17:14, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Himmler stating rejection 

message: The claim is made in the Holocaust section that Professor Bauer believes "the Holocaust was the worst single case of genocide in history" but I have heard him explicitly denying this in a recent lecture to an audience of schoolteachers at Yad Vashem and available now on YouTube. There is no citation for the claim made in the article and I believe he probably never held such an opinion but if he did so he has certainly changed this opinion. There might be a confusion in the minds of some how Professor Bauer speaks of the uniqueness of the Jewish Holocaust but this is identical to the uniqueness of every case of genocide where the specificity of the victims' experience must be appreciated. Professor Bauer believes there to be no measure of the Jewish Holocaust event which can support the view that it was the worst single case of genocide in history. Someone needs to fix this serious error. SanVitores (talk) 04:59, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Holocaust as the worst single case of genocide in history 

message: There should be a space before "Bauer" in the sentence that begins "Bauer has criticized..." Kamtal75 (talk) 09:02, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: . lettherebedarklight晚安 13:51, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

text: botched the ping, @kamtal75. lettherebedarklight晚安 13:52, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 December 2022 

message: A more up-to-date photo would be desirable here and in the articles in other languages. Mcljlm (talk) 16:42, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 

message: Please remove from the introduction: "Bauer is a Bosnian genocide denier who has claimed that the Srebrenica massacre was an "act of mass murder, but not genocide".<ref>Ivica Bakota; (2019) Bosnia-Herzegovina social briefing: Bosnian genocide denial p. 4;  "
This statement was recently added by another user, and is defamatory and inaccurate. Bauer does not deny the events that took place at Srebrenica, but rather discusses how the legal definition of genocide is applied to different instances of mass murder as part of his work (source: https://www.ushmm.org/m/pdfs/20070215-bauer.pdf). Furthermore, the Srebrenica massacre is not a central focus of Bauer's scholarship in any way, and should not be included in the first section of his article. A quick internet search will reveal that this change is primarily intended to slander Bauer, not to contribute to the body of knowledge in the article. Furthermore, looking at the history of the edits on the article, you will see that this information has never been previously phrased this way in the article, raising serious questions regarding its veracity. The source that is included to support this edit is also obscure and dubious, and is not a reputable academic source. 100.15.203.82 (talk) 13:42, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Pinging , who made the edit. User:CanonNi (talk • contribs) 13:50, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 3 June 2024