Talk:Fredrick Töben

Bias?
Yeah, there's mega-bias in the article. Here's why:

(1) Regarding the below, here are the facts. Toben is German-born. Toben lives in Australia. Toben has been convicted in Germany of the charge listed. (Note this is not a matter of whether he actually did it; it's a matter of what he was charged with and whether he was found guilty -- he was.) Finally, Toben is a Holocaust denier given the definition set out in Irving v. Lipstadt.

(2) The "Views" section is not tempered with either counterpoints or modulating statements that, e.g., "This is what Toben believes," etc. Rather, it flatly states that belief in the Holocaust is a belief in a conspiracy theory. THIS IS BIAS!

(3) The article states that Raul Hilberg (note correct spelling!) admitted a well-known fact under oath. Hilberg had written as much in 1961, almost thirty years before Canada v. Zundel.

Those edits, by the way, come from Adelaide. So just who do you think made them, eh?

206.16.237.13 (talk) 21:46, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Although I agree that denial of the holocaust is denial of one of the most important events of the 20th century, the opening quote: "German-born Holocaust denier who lives in Australia and who has been convicted in Germany of inciting racial hatred" definitely adds negative bias to this article. In the view of freedom of speech, people such as this holocaust denier should not be forced to believe in certain events in history, science, philosophy, etc. In addition, they should not be charged viewed with a negative attitude by those opposing their views. If it happens that these "deniers" or "non-believers" are being hated, cannot it also be said that the haters are also committing "hatecrime"? (though it may not be on the level relative to that of the "deniers". (Now a piece of my own opinion: As an editor of wikipedia, I am finding many biographical articles and people being branded as "anti-semite", "anti-Jewish", or "anti-zionists". While I believe in the hope of decreasing racism in the world, the steps that these editors have taken in their "racist" labeling can be seen as over-excessive. From my experience (pardon me for original research), these steps often create an anti-Jewish or anti-Israel sentiment.)Count de Chagny 00:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Why is there no mention of Holocaust Denial or Revisionism in this article? I refer you to the Adelaide Institute entry. 71.192.178.26 06:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

this man sits in prison, this article should at least reflect some of his points of reasoning so we can understand where he is coming from. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.177.10.53 (talk) 06:49, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

History should not fear examination
Why is holocaust denial such a crime? Surely Nazis are entitled to their opinions. There are no shortage of Nazi sympathisers Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Bush family (Google "Prescott Bush"). Millions of Africans were murdered by Europeans and Americans, genocide has been allowed to happen on numerous occasions since WW2. As many as a million Iraqis have been killed in the last 20 years many of whom had little choice in the matter. None of these "holocaust deniers" insight violence or further killing. I have many questions regarding the holocaust, I am not evil, I would like to know what happened before I was born. I don't like one sided history (often written by the victors), everyone is biased. The numbers killed at Auschwitz was quietly revised down from 4 million to 1.1 million (the plaque was even changed), I'd like this explained. I also wonder about the laws of physics, statistics and logistics. Should I be arrested for these thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.194.65.222 (talk) 17:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia, not a forum for debate. You won't find any/much discussion on that subject here. BOMBkangaroo (talk) 16:28, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

cited sources
I came to this article to put in a bit about 1st October 2008 and Toben's detention in the UK. Because this is a biography article about a living person I think that the following references should be replaced with what are considered reliable sources: As I am not a regular contributor to this page, I am not going to do the donkey work to find other sources and as they are all marginal and not clearly unreliable, I will not flag them as such, but I hope a regular contributor to this page can find better sources to cover the facts that these citations currently cover.--Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 09:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial in the Iranian Media,Special dispatch No. 855, Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) 28 January 2005 -- The Wikipedia article Middle East Media Research Institute says "When founded in 1998, MEMRI's staff of seven included three who had formerly served in Military Intelligence in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF)". It would be better if main stream news paper or a peer reviewed journal can be used for this information (WP:SOURCES).
 * Mike Jeffries, Sydney Radio Interview, 13 April 13, 1999 -- This transcript is held on David Irving's website. I would point you to what Richard J. Evans said about Irving "Not one of [Irving's] books, speeches or articles, not one paragraph, not one sentence in any of them, can be taken on trust as an accurate representation of its historical subject. All of them are completely worthless as history, because Irving cannot be trusted anywhere, in any of them, to give a reliable account of what he is talking or writing about. ... if we mean by historian someone who is concerned to discover the truth about the past, and to give as accurate a representation of it as possible, then Irving is not a historian."(Holocaust Denial On Trial).
 * USA/Canada: The Crucifixion of Ernst Zündel, Adelaide Institute, Newsletter 186, March 2003. This is Toben's own website and should be avoided see WP:SPS
 * i disagree: see "Using self-published and questionable sources as sources on themselves" WP:SPS. adelaide has toben's self-published words, cited here to show what he personally claims. so this meets standards for self-published sources, "especially in articles about themselves." Kiphinton (talk) 08:20, 24 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Heres a source with info on court dates --> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7652274.stm hope that helps. ( Hypnosadist )  22:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Nationality
His nationality is not in the article, and this is very important —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.31.220.27 (talk) 20:35, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:TBR42.jpg
The image Image:TBR42.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --03:32, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

link 4
link 4 which has been used to support this ..."Töben has frequently been called a Holocaust denier" looks to me like it fails to meet wikipedia reliable source. It looks more like an online blog and appears to be a charity reporting on anti semetism and requests donations to aid this mission. So it looks like neutrality is an issue. (Off2riorob (talk) 17:43, 16 May 2009 (UTC))


 * resolved thanks. (Off2riorob (talk) 23:17, 16 May 2009 (UTC))

Revisionist? Bias is evident
"Revisionist works?" And yet; from his, and many other's POV it is considered that claiming the holocaust occurred as jewish and christian history reports is revisionist. Try making such blatant POV statements neutral. Lostinlodos (talk) 08:34, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Pressac
Here's why I continue to contest the notion of Faurisson's "challenge" that Töben's biography contains.

First of all, there was a big problem with this bio in so far as the portion of the bio in question had heavy, heavy bias. So that was edited to remove POV statements. The problem now, however, is that Faurisson's challenge, included still in the bio, has been met. To not allow the statement that the challenge has been met is to implicitly imply that it has not been met.

That is not acceptable. This is not a debatable issue. Faurisson said, "Show me or draw me a gas chamber." His former acolyte, Jean-Claude Pressac, went to Auschwitz and provided an entire book that shows gas chambers and how they worked:

http://www.holocaust-history.org/auschwitz/pressac/technique-and-operation/

If this book is not an acceptable third-party source for the FACT that he answered Faurisson's challenge, then please tell me what would be.

I'm waiting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.112.4.154 (talk) 16:28, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

P.S. An alternative solution is to remove the Faurisson quote, which is not sourced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.112.4.154 (talk) 16:31, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

It is nonsense to claim Pressac met Faurisson's challenge - to date no-one has provided the physical evidence of fact: six million died - claim made during World War One; systematic state execution = no written order; the murder weapon = homicidal gas chambers. Like the 9/11 tragedy, the physical facts are not proven, i.e. the overarching narrative trying to explain the physical facts is a reality in memory only, not in space and time. Note Van Pelt/Dwork claiming in 1996 that no homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz Stammlager in their work: Auschwitz: From 1270 to the present. Fredrick Toben - Adelaide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.225.135.179 (talk) 06:24, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Biography section
An anonymous IP substituted the hagiographic advertising copy on Töbin's own website for the biography section here; I've undone that for being clearly WP:POV. Goodwinsands (talk) 13:18, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
 * thanks, I hadn't realised that's what had happened. Dougweller (talk) 16:06, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Toben editing this article?
Note the last IP edits claimed they were the subject of the article. I see a number of IP edits from Australia, it's possible these are all Toben. Dougweller (talk) 07:30, 10 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Assuming it is Töben, I left a COI note on his talk page. I've also reverted the unsourced information, but not before trying to find possible reliable sources to support the content. I discovered the text was nearly identical to an article in The Journal of Historical Review, a non-peer reviewed journal. The WP:COPYVIO was unacceptable, the source in question isn't a reliable source, and the subject's statements about himself cannot indicate any significance or due weight at all. The information should be included only when reliable sources indicate it merits mention because of some amount of enduring biographical significance. JFHJr (㊟) 16:15, 30 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I've started a dialogue, assuming it is the subject, inviting the IP to contact OTRS post further concerns and edit requests here instead of his own talk page. So far, some of the content has needed POV treatment while other content just needed better sourcing. FWIW, I've come across lots of citations and references to one of his Australian court cases, indicating it has had some impact in Australian jurisprudence. The subject wants information on his company added, but I haven't looked into it. Also, per his request, I've cited to another court case as well; his claims to have won appear in a valid secondary source. I think the request pretty well waives concerns of WP:BLPPRIMARY. JFHJr (㊟) 05:40, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Bibliography removed
I've removed a section labeled "Bibliography" because it was not a bibliography in regards to any content in this article. It was just a list of the subject's publications, none of which is demonstrably notable or even noteworthy, as in worth any mention according to WP:WEIGHT. Because I've removed an entire section, I thought I'd open this thread in case anyone wants to discuss. I'll welcome huzzahs and boos alike, if there are WP:POLICY based comments. JFHJr (㊟) 04:05, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Toben (allegedly) again
29/12/2012 I am amazed how childishly and fearfully the editorial team perverts the article about my person. I have attempted to correct the glaring factual errors contained within Ben Moshe's nonsense report. Then my university qualifications and the fact I am a qualified and registered teacher is airbrushed out, as is the whole issue of being bankrupted because I refuse to believe in the myth and lies that make up Holocaust-Shoah propaganda. Surely, the fight for truth in history is such a fundamental challenge that the young minds who do the editing are already aware how living on a lie cripples one's mental wellbeing. My crime is what? Asking probing questions about what the official Holocaust-Shoah narrative throws out as factually true - and which is legally protected. Why this legal protection? When the Bolshevik Revolution established itself the GuLags began to fill with dissenters who were labelled REVISIONISTS. Those who had been labelled ANTISEMITE were shot. Such is the Talmudic-Communist legacy that today is flowing through GLOBAL WARMING/sustainable living and HOLOCAUST-SHOAH that the free and democratic west is adopting as its new substitute religion and where free expression-natural justice is considered to be the new heresy.

Fredrick Töben — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.226.155 (talk) 10:06, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Nice rant. Besides the fact that there is no editorial team, you don't seem to have a clue as to how Wikipedia works. We really don't care what you say here, what we care about are sources meeting our criteria at WP:RS, and your problem is that you either haven't provided them, don't like them, or change material sourced to them. Plus of course per WP:COI you shouldn't be making major changes to the article. You've been told about OTRS and probably about WP:BLPN. Until you follow our policies and guidelines you aren't going to get very far. Dougweller (talk) 16:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Since my mental well-being has been "crippled", I guess I'm not qualified to comment substantively. Funny how it works out that way.  Nomoskedasticity (talk) 17:13, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

More
Have a view of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Parncutt and you will note the list of publications and detailed study course, etc. that are listed. In my case you delete my publication list and then fiddle about again, and smirk that my comments are just a 'nice rant'. It appears to me you are young and you still think you are going to get somewhere in life the easy way by distorting and smearing those individuals you fear and hate, for whatever reason. I would like to see your maturity develop as well, but when you state above: 'We really don't care what you say here', that indicates to me your personal problem. So be it - I seek comfort in the knowledge that I am not the only one who objects to the editorial team's political bias. If you view this entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Einfeld you will be interested to know this man spends at least $1,000 a month on trying to defeat any adverse articles and entries about his person from surfacing. In conclusion, my objections rest on the fact that you are distorting and justifying with your biased mindset a world view that is morally and intellectually corrupt if not outright bankrupt. So, good luck to you and your fiddling the books, and a Happy New Year 2013. Fredrick Toben, Adelaide — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.226.155 (talk) 10:51, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Lol. Toben couldn't have gotten that more wrong, calling me young. Dougweller (talk) 13:48, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

FT replies 3 January 2013: I judge the attitude and values embodied within your contribution as being 'young' or perhaps I should have stated 'infantile', 'immature', 'unbalanced', 'prejudiced' 'fearful' - and much room for improvement/development. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.226.155 (talk) 23:43, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I thought you'd left. I can see no reason to let you continue to make personal attacks here - anymore and I will remove them. I'll leave the above as they are, well, interesting. Dougweller (talk) 07:06, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Gerald Fredrick Töben. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081106133003/http://www.news.com.au:80/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24578173-5012749,00.html to http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24578173-5012749,00.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:06, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Views on the Holocaust
The statement: "Töben has stated that he considers the Holocaust to be a lie[33] ostensibly perpetuated by "the Holocaust Racketeers, the corpse peddlers and the Shoah Business Merchants";[34]" is not supported by the citations given. The last citation [34]refers to an article in Newsletter 186 http://www.adelaideinstitute.org/newsletters/n186.html that was actually written by Mr David Brockschmidt who talks about "corpse peddlers". The other citation [33] given doesn't mention Toben making this statement that it's a "lie". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.144.96.1 (talk) 01:58, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The 'lie' bit is correct and I've added another source, I've deleted the other. Doug Weller  talk 20:49, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gerald Fredrick Töben. 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/20060802010555/http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=countries&Area=iran&ID=SP85505 to http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=countries&Area=iran&ID=SP85505
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110402155429/http://www.hreoc.gov.au/legal/publications/review2002/change_continuity_supplement_sept02_aug03.doc to http://www.hreoc.gov.au/legal/publications/review2002/change_continuity_supplement_sept02_aug03.doc

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) 18:19, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 January 2018
Change

"He has even involved in a number of controversies and court actions and has served three jail sentences: in 1999"

To

"He has been involved in a number of controversies and court actions and has served three jail sentences: in 1999"

or something similar 109.150.115.135 (talk) 17:25, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ Nomoskedasticity (talk) 18:50, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

The image should be replaced
About one million people died in Auschwitz. Toben misuses Auschwitz.Xx236 (talk) 07:46, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yet another comment from you that is incomplete and unintelligible, so no action is likely to be taken. If you want results, you need to write coherently and provide context so that other editors can evaluate your concerns and act on them if they agree.  Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:32, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I find a Holocaust selfie inappropriate. I find usage of such picture in this Wikipedia inappropriate. People steal artefacts, urinate, stripp naked  in Auschwitz. Proud Toben in Birkenau belongs to this category. Xx236 (talk) 08:46, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I make no excuses whatsoever for Toben's ideology, which I find abhorrent, but are you honestly saying that a picture of a man standing in front of the Birkenau entrance in a suit is the equivalent of stealing artifacts, stripping naked, or urinating? I'm sorry, but that's just totally absurd. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:21, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but you belong to an another world and I don't want to belong to your world.Xx236 (talk) 07:22, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I belong to the real world, I have no idea why you would think otherwise. Get a consensus. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:27, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The file has been nominated for deletion. The discussion can be found here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:44, 13 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I added a known_for to the infobox. I do think the prior infobox was non-neutral in that if one were just looking at the infobox one would not know this person is primarily known for denial. I think there might be scope for modifying the caption of the image to make this clear. Icewhiz (talk) 07:38, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

MEMRI
Hi. MEMRI isn't a reliable source and especially cant be used to assert anything contentious on a page covered by BLP (BLP applies to all living people, even vile ones). Also I dont believe that was an appropriate use of WP:rollback so I would like an explanation of why it was used. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 07:41, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I gather that that's your personal view. Having checked RSN, I see no indication that this view is widely shared. Instead of simply deleting, you could also look for additional sources.  Nomoskedasticity (talk) 07:46, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe you should check RSN again, its certainly covered well. As it seems you are unfamiliar with their work a quick skim of MEMRI should indicate to you that the organization is very far from reliable. WP:BLP is clear, if its not a WP:RS we cant make assertions using it even if they are 100% true. You also failed to offer an explanation for the use of rollback which you do *need* to do. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 07:49, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I see the reliability is often discussed, but I never see a conclusive answer whether MEMRI is reliable or not. However, Mr. Töben's claim to fame is, according to the article, that he was director and founder of the Adelaide Institute, a Holocaust denial group in Australia. Then calling it "unreliable" that he rejects what he calls the "official conspiracy theory" that Germans systematically exterminated European Jewry, sounds weird to me.Jeff5102 (talk) 08:53, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I have not for one second said that the material is false or unreliable just that the source doesnt meet WP:BLP and that per BLP if, as you say, there is no "conclusive answer whether MEMRI is reliable or not” then we can't use MEMRI. If it was a non-BLP page I would simply remove the citation and leave the text with a citation needed tag but BLP gives us literally zero wiggle room. I have tried searching the quote but I cant find it reported in any WP:RS. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 08:57, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Most relevant section of BLP (there are a few other parts which are also relevant) "Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.” Even if we give MEMRI the benefit of the doubt the information would still be poorly sourced as MEMRI isnt a WP:RS. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 09:00, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I would beg to differ. MEMRI doesn't pop up in the Potentially unreliable sources, or in similar overviews. Thus, I would say it passes WP:RS until furher notice.Jeff5102 (talk) 10:22, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Thats an essay not policy... WP:RS is a guideline and WP: Verifiability is policy, on wikipedia sources are considered to be unreliable until proven to be reliable. If you want to use MEMRI you have to show that it complies with the standards set out at WP:RS and Verifiability. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 10:45, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Also now that I look at the text itself theres a major issue: the quote "official conspiracy theory” does not appear in the source, he actually says something much nastier. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 11:00, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Death seems to be unsourced
We can't say he's dead without reliable sources. Doug Weller talk 15:20, 30 June 2020 (UTC)