Talk:Alessandra Kersevan

"Negationism"

{{Request edit}} Kersevan just want to underline the italian war crimes as a cause of foibe killings, instead italian fascist and xenofobic mass media try to deny this historical evidence by censorship (ie documentaries like Lion of the desert or Fascist legacy) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.178.76.86 (talk) 09:03, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

There are no historical sources that confirm that Kersevan is a negationist. The source numer 1 is NOT the opinion of italian government but it is an article taken form "Libero" (an italian xenophobic paper), therefore is nothing official. The other sources are right wing oriented and therefore extremely POV, therefore I ask to remove it until there are not stated opinions 195.178.76.86 (talk) 09:03, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

• I have placed the tag for you, I cannot read Italian language so i am unable to help you here. Some one will respond soon to this. -- ÐℬigXЯaɣ 13:26, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

I removed "For her thesis rejected by the historiographic mainstream on the subject, Alessandra Kersevan is considered a negationist of the Foibe massacres and after-war persecutions", becaus eit is absolutely false and because it is not true that the historiographic mainstream considers Kersevan as negationist.

The opinion of unbiased historicians is content in the italian-slovene commision http://www.storicamente.org/commissione_mista.pdf, which is the UNIQUE unbiased and bilateral historician document on foibe, it states that:

1) before the fascism there was rivalry between italians and sloven but hate and violences were not common

2) the italian war crime are the main reason of foibe killings

3) the victims of foibe were often fascist collaborationists, therefore foibe killings can NOT be considered as ethnic cleansing.

That considerations are the same of Kersevan, therefore she can NOT be considered negationist — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.178.76.86 (talk) 13:42, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

It looks like this is a content dispute, rather than a specific edit request. It also appears that the ip initiating this discussion is making edits to the page personally anyway. Therefore, I am disabling the {{requested edit}} template. If you have any further edit requests that require a 3rd party, please feel free to re-enable the template. Thanks.   — Jess· Δ♥ 06:50, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry but the ip are heavily misrepresenting the truth. Historians like Pupo, Spazzali and others used the term negationism for Cernigoi and Kersevan. The president of the Province of La Spezia was compelled to apologize publicly after have invited Kersevan in a public meeting about Foibe. I'm going to insert again sourced informations about Kersevan negationist thesis. I have to remind to the ip that removing sourced informations is vandalism. -Theirrulez (talk) 20:34, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

The meaning of the term has been changed in Italian public discourse

Well, in fact there must be said that in Italy there's a misuse of the term negationist. Whereas it is correctly used when addressing those historians that openly - or less - deny the Holocaust, in Italy it has become the new passcode to address those who sustain issues that go against the new right-wing revanchists and the Istrian refugees associations which have historically been the reservoir of votes for former fascist and nationalist parties. Indeed, a lot of civilians in those places were collaborators of Fascist police and Kersevan's studies point out this aspect of Italian presence in former Yugoslav regions; ready or not, Italians were seen as invaders there (and in fact they did a lot of crime wars in those regions). But saying that means questioning the whole grounds which tragedies that saw Italian people as victims are based on. That's why refugees associations and right-wing politicians asked for censorship against Kersevan and her staff, and why a former Minister of the Republic (recently in February on the 1st Channell of the State TV) could safely address her as contiguous to the Soviet KGB when she contested a photo to be attributed to the slaughering of Italians whereas it was , actually , a group of Italian soldiers gunning some Yugoslav citizens (I am talking about this photo, which original is in Lubljana and here is reproduced by the Italian newspaper la Repubblica ). -- SERGIO aka the Black Cat 14:28, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Dear Black Cat, thank you for pointing out the meaning of the term has been changed in Italian public discourse, in the way it is unseen in the rest of Europe. The user Theirrulez who tried to discredit Kersevan by calling her 'negationist' is to be sanctioned if he tries to do it again - see this (click to read the text of the warning) warning (that has been issued by an Wikipedia administrator EdJohnston). Thanks again, DancingPhilosopher ^{my talk} 22:26, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Warning related to the censorship against Alessandra Kersevan's research and publications

Below I am quoting, for everyone to see, the above mentioned administrator's warning related to the censorship against Alessandra Kersevan's research and publications. DancingPhilosopher ^{my talk} 20:01, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

“ (...) an *editorial* in an Italian newspaper, scarcely a reliable source, when this historian's work suggests that the Italian government may have engaged in a conspiracy to cover up wartime atrocities by its own military. If you continue to disrupt the Kersevan article by inappropriate editing, further sanctions are possible. This warning is being logged in the WP:ARBMAC case. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 04:31, 27 April 2012 (UTC) ”

Exactly the same as other articles on Fiume, Istria, Foibe killings

This article uses the same handful of dubious sources as many others - most of them no longer link to anything, some of them link to media outlets that clearly have an editorial bias and some of them link to articles actually unrelated to the claims they are meant to support. No coincidence that many of these pages were created by the user DancingPhilosopher and all of them are aggressively guarded by said user. Whole passages are actually directly copied and pasted between these articles. The moral of the story is to never do your research on Wikipedia! Wannabe rockstar (talk) 23:12, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alessandra Kersevan. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.balcanicaucaso.org/aree/Slovenia/Pulizia-etnica-all-italiana

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:35, 4 July 2016 (UTC)