I do not believe that anyone had ever denied Roman battles, or Roman atrocities in battle, until physical proof was shown.
Also, the article you cite would fail several 'revisionist' standards; many of you would demand scientific dating of the bones, the location of weapons, proof of a nearby battle, proof of other such massacres, and on, and on, and on, and on...
Did you miss this sentence:
The skeletons will be taken to Oxford for further analysis before being offered to a Dorset museum.
Further analysis...........the revisionist argument is being conducted on the skeletons. No taboos on Rome?
Provide us with proof of gassings and atrocities in Auschwitz or anywhere else from 60 years ago.