User talk:Chris troutman/Carl Kosta Savich

Untitled
The most recent edits to this page have added some strong claims of bias. These need to be supported more strongly to survive a review for WP:NPOV. --Bill W. Smith, Jr. (talk/contribs) 12:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Too much Serbian this that
It was added too many times his pro-Serbian side, it is enough to say it in one place. TheShining4 19:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced claim
I've removed the latter half of this sentence: "'He also criticised what he calls the blatant hypocrisy of the UN Special Envoy to Kosovo Martti Ahtisaari, who during his presidential career sought to commemorate the Finnish soldiers that voluntarily served in the SS during the Second World War.'"

I tried to google up sources for it, both in Finnish and English, but found nothing that wasn't related to Mr. Savich somehow. I don't think such a strong claim should stay in unless someone can properly source it. --Twinzor Say hi! - Do I suck or rock? 11:28, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Serbian Propagandist at its best
Carl Kosta Savich is criticized for his public denials of Srebrenica genocide. He is also known for his activism in revisioning WW2 history. He is widely known for defending Serb Nazi Chetniks who collaborated with Germans of any wrong doing in the WW 2. To this date, he refuses to acknowledge Serbian involvement in the Holocaust against the Jews in Yugoslavia. Bosniak (talk) 00:46, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I deleted the Criticism section for several reasons; parts of it are factually incorrect and all of it is pourly sourced. WP:BLP requires much more solid sources if we're to attribute such a negative description to a living person. Big Bird (talk • contribs) 16:51, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

'Historian'
I must object to the description of Carl Savich as an 'historian' or an 'academic'. We after all, don't refer to David Irving as any of those words. Leaving aside the fact that he is a genocide denier and an apologist for the Nazi-quisling Nedic regime and the Nazi-collaborationist Chetniks, and has engaged in libelous smears agaisnt his opponents without actually addressing any of their points (for example, he claimed, without a single shred of evidence, that Phillip Cohen did not write his own book), and has engaged in anti-Semetic writing; he has no qualifications in history beyond a Master's degree, has never publsihed any literature on the topic, has never been cited by a respectable organisation, has never produced any articles in peer-reviewed journals and has never held an acedemic post. This is particularly amusing when the apologist for Nazi-quisling Serbia accuses Ljubica Stefan, who protected Jews during the Holocaust and who is a fully tenured professor at a Belgrade university, of being a 'pseudo-historian' guilty of‘historical revisionism', or Marko Attila Hoare, who is also a tenured professor at Kingston University and has published articles and books on Bosnia and Yugoslavia, of being 'befuddled, lost, and delusional'. Ana Radic (talk) 20:31, 19 February 2013 (UTC)