Thanks for the answer. I've read that David Irving is a Dresden Liar and Holocaust Denier.
I found this commentary on Irving's book by following footnote #13 of the Wikipedia article you first mentioned on this thread.
Irving’s account of the bombing of Dresden manipulates and invents material, misinterprets documents, and gives weight to unreliable documents. He also gives undue weight to eyewitness testimony when it suits him, and falsifies statistics in order to put the behaviour of the Allies and particularly Churchill, in a negative lightThere are some very useful footnotes on the Wikipedia page that you originally cited.
Here's more information, from footnote 29, of your Wikipedia article
...The Daily Telegraph issued a memo to all its correspondents. "It is incorrect," it said, "to describe David Irving as a historian....
You will notice that I have quoted the Air Marshal in the Foreword and Prime Minister Winston Churchill - direct sources on the historical record. I also excerpted F. J. P. Veale's book on "Advance to Barbarism" who cited Air Secretary Spaight. Demonizing Irving to discredit the quotes will not change the quotes.
In Irving's defense, Irving was the first to detect the Hitler forgeries that "establishment" historians had accepted as "genuine" - so much for Irving not being a historian. If you don't want to believe Churchill or Spaight on terror bombing - or Saunders on Dresden being a great tragedy, that's your option.