Talk:And you are lynching Negroes/GA2

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

Reviewer: R8R (talk · contribs) 12:25, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

I reviewed the article during the first GAN. My concerns from back then have been addressed. I will review the article once again to ensure I haven't overseen any problems.--R8R (talk) 12:25, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Still looks good to me. All criteria seem to be satisfied or close to that: here are the few nitpicks I could produce:


 * Michael Bohm, a U.S. reporter working out of Moscow, became the target of the phrase after appearing on the political talk show Sunday Evening With Vladimir Solovyov. While I, as a Russian, happen to know some information about the show, it is fair to presume most native English speakers won't. It perhaps would be great to say that this show is run on a major TV channel---a state-run channel---in the prime time. That would provide some context.


 * I happen to know some of the media mentioned---The Economist, for example---but it could be better to generally describe some of the less-known ones. "Writing for The New Republic" is barely useful. "Writing for the American liberal magazine The New Republic" works much better. Same applies for: National Review; FrontPage Magazine; The Diplomat; Open Democracy; Haaretz.

Perhaps that is it. Once these issues have been resolved, I'll be happy to promote the article.--R8R (talk) 00:14, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for these helpful suggestions. I've made the changes per all of your recommendations, as I've agreed with all of your points. Sagecandor (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I have no further objections. Congratulations!--R8R (talk) 21:53, 17 July 2017 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

For the record, the pictures and copyvio are all fine.--R8R (talk) 21:58, 17 July 2017 (UTC)