Talk:Igor Vukić

Removal of reliably sourced content
I disagree with this edit, which removed an accurate summary of what the reliable source says. "How BLPs are written" is precisely on the basis of such reliable sources. I also find it bizarre that GregorB said in a later edit that this could be used as a source, while at the same time removing content sourced to it. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:02, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * To say that his book "follows the tradition of holocaust denial by cherry-picking and incorrectly citing historical sources" is not NPOV, even with sources. (NPOV is not merely about having sources; I could also find RS which describe him as a "level-headed, dispassionate researcher" - I'm not making this up - but if someone said it, that still doesn't make it true.) I really don't like when BLPs are piled up with these sorts of statements. It should be worded differently, and these sources provide the material. I'd do it myself (i.e. expand the article along these lines) if we establish Vukić is notable (doubtful, I'd say). GregorB (talk) 12:36, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm sure that you could find loads of web sites that describe him as a level-headed, dispassionate researcher, but I would challenge you to find reliable sources, i.e. written by historians at well-renowned universities, that do so. The content that you deleted is supported by pretty well all reliable sources. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:41, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * In fact, the above-mentioned description comes from Milan Ivkošić's article on Vukić's book (referred to by Goran Hutinec himself in the used source) published in Večernji list, "one of the leading Croatian daily newspapers" according to Hutinec. On top of that, Ivkošić apparently thinks Vukić's book is a "huge contribution to the search for truth on Jasenovac".
 * For the record, I'm definitely not suggesting Ivkošić's views are on par with Hutinec's - Ivkošić is not a historian by any stretch of imagination. I'm also not suggesting the article should establish a some sort of phony "balance" between these two views (I don't think Ivkošić's views are worth mentioning at all). I'll write the alternative myself, give me a couple of days and then see what you think. GregorB (talk) 11:33, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

The point of this edit?
, what is the point of this edit? Merely telling us that Vukić "offers exlanations [sic] about his activities"? I'm sure he does, but what does it matter? Do his "explanations" differ from those of other WWII revisionists? GregorB (talk) 15:49, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment: I improved my editing now.RadioElectrico (talk) 16:51, 8 February 2019 (UTC)