"Revisionist" history has a long history, for that's the point of continued research -- to discover what you can of 'the rest of the story.' Anyone that publishes a new fact, or even interpretation is 'revising' what's known / thought. Yet the term has become a label to dismiss the facts / interpretation.
Were the 17th scientists like Galileo, Huygens, van Leeuwenhoek "revisionists"? You bet. I enjoy having my mind changed by convincing research, and volume-level or heat don't really equal persuasion. For me, history has often proved to be, "what I THOUGHT I knew."
All the Allied histories of the ETO written before the 1970s were ignorant of the role of ULTRA, so while Cornelius Ryan's The Longest Day may still read well, it must be rated now as an incomplete story.
One of the posters in this thread produced an old chestnut about the long war in SE Asia, regarding not being 'allowed' to fight... This is a mostly-aeroplane board, yes? Well, US and RVN aircraft flew 6,000,000 sorties. The US dropped EIGHT MILLION TONS of bombs on SE Asia. It fired another EIGHT MILLION TONS of artillery rounds, just in S. Vietnam. I think they were trying hard. You may wish to investigate the numbers for all of WW-II to compare.
Perhaps no one's mind will be changed by this small bottle floating in a vast sea of rhetoric. I'll step down off the soapbox, now.
P.S. We cannot blame only the winners for myths and half-truths. Jeff Davis wrote a memoir. Abe Lincoln didn't.