Talk:And you are lynching Negroes/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: R8R Gtrs (talk · contribs) 11:05, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

I'll review the article within a few days.--R8R (talk) 11:05, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

First reading impressions
What immediately catches my eye is that the Stalin period and the Cold War are two intersecting periods of time. Stalin ruled until 1953 while the Cold War started within a year at most after the end of WWII in 1945.

"a Russian political joke about a dispute between an American and a Soviet man." -- this signifies that the joke is important; why not tell it, or at least the punchline, in the text? also, when was this joke first told?

"the 1905 anti-Jewish riot Kishinev pogrom" first of all, see WP:SEAOFBLUE; second, "riot" and "pogrom" are synonyms; third, 1905 was certainly not in the Stalin era

"Dmitri Moor" it is a good practice to name the nationality and profession of a newly introduced person. "Russian/Soviet artist Dmitri Moor"

"Sherwood Eddy" same; "author" is a vague and meaningless description since we've mentioned the book anyway

"visiting Moscow from French colonial Africa" mmm?

"Dmitry Manuilsky" same as for all names

"During the Stalin era [...] During the Stalin era" unnecessary repetition

"worked its way into fiction written in the country" are we talking about fiction literature books?

"By 1948, the phrase had become a common witticism" -- what's so special about that particular year?

"after being arrested after complaining" this sentence could use a rephrasing

"war poet Konstantin Simonov" sea of blue, again

"Alexander Pushkin" same as for all names

"Abdurakhman Avtorkhanov" same as for all names

"Combat" same would also apply here for the same reasons

it is strange that the joke a sentence before the claim of "Soviet socialist patriotism" clearly doesn't match it and no explanation has been given

"It was used as an aphorism among fellow Soviets during the Mikhail Gorbachev period, as an answer to complaints about the lack of civil and political rights including freedom of movement.[41] A variant used during this time as a form of reciprocity when faced with criticism over imprisonment and treatment of Refuseniks, was to put the focus on race in the United States criminal justice system with the phrase "you beat up Negroes!"[42] A similar phrase was used to counter complaints about Soviet transportation inefficiency: "Yes, but you in America, you beat the Negroes!"[19]" these cases are basically all the same -- shifting focus away from Soviet problems to an American one. There is no need to mention the punchline in each sentence.

" the term had become a synecdoche as a reference referring to all of Soviet propaganda" in Russia or in the U.S.?

"An alternative version of the phrase was ported for usage in Poland as: "And they beat up Blacks at your country!"[44][45]" I would assume that the socialist countries devised same means of defense against others' accusations of their negative attributes. Does it have much to do with the post-socialist Poland? Maybe we should just mention that this punchline was also used in other socialist countries as well in the previous subsection and get rid of the Variants section (since the difference is only in exact wordings, and no wording is so canonical that it couldn't be altered?

"it had become a figure of speech referring to the entirety of Soviet propaganda." we've mentioned that already

"The book Exit from Communism" written by whom?

what I found strange is that this whole Analysis section (this title makes me expect a deep analysis) does not analyze why this idiom is even used. Sure, to blame America when they blame Russia. Why won't they ignore the blamers? The answer that comes to my mind is that it was an ideological rivalry in the Soviet Union and that now it is felt that Russia is not given the proper place in the world stage with America being the evildoer. "Also, have you seen their national debt piling up?" "And they tell us to do something about our democracy when their own democracy of only two parties is clearly flawed?" "And what about bombings in Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Libya?" all of these are related points to the subject, not less so than Donald Trump. This is the sort of material that I would expect to see under the title Analysis.

"Kevin D. Williamson", "Daniel Greenfield", "David Volodzko", "Maxim Edwards", "Catherine Putz", "Donald Trump", "Chemi Shalev" same as for all names

"the famous tu quoque argument ... and you are lynching Negroes." this is one occurrence of the endlessly many that we can go without to at least slightly reduce their number

"which the Soviet Union used" unnecessary synecdoche. Who used it?

why is post-Soviet Russia not mentioned in the lead if the phrase is still used?

I'll monitor the progress and will compare the article against the criteria once these issues have been resolved.--R8R (talk) 12:13, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Comment
R8R Gtrs, Sagecandor has made no edits to the article since your review and own edits; the notification about your review starting appears to have been archived from Sagecandor's talk page during an extended absence, and there has been no progress on another GA nomination either. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:43, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You're right. I caught myself thinking that just two days ago. I have no choice but to fail the nomination.--R8R (talk) 21:27, 12 March 2017 (UTC)