He is indeed a revisionist or more probably ignorant and stupid from seeing his other comments.
In this case the wiki article looks OK but I stand by my claim about Wikipedia.
It’s useful to look up stuff about flowers, geography, mathematics and other stuff.
But if the subject has the slightest political relevance it can’t be trusted.
The wiki article is actually very good. The historical revisionist is just claiming that it says things which it definitely does not.
He is indeed a revisionist or more probably ignorant and stupid from seeing his other comments.
In this case the wiki article looks OK but I stand by my claim about Wikipedia.
It’s useful to look up stuff about flowers, geography, mathematics and other stuff.
But if the subject has the slightest political relevance it can’t be trusted.