Talk:Shostakovich v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp./GA1

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

Reviewer: CurryTime7-24 (talk · contribs) 17:32, 2 October 2023 (UTC)


 * I will begin my review of this GA nomination later today(PDT). —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 17:32, 2 October 2023 (UTC)




 * Re. misspellings of composer names: They are both misspelled. Хачатурян is usually transliterated as "Khachaturian" and sometimes "Khachaturyan", but "Kat" does not correspond with "Хач". "Khach", "Hach", "Chach", and "Xach" are possible, but not "Kat" (which would be "Кат"). "Miashovsky" is also wrong. There is no "ш" ("sh") in "Myaskovsky" ("Мясковский"). The "к" ("k") and "в" ("v") are also missing. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 04:48, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Added sic. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:52, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Mention of the New York Supreme Court should also be clarified in the article body. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 04:50, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * There's a paranthetical referring to it as the trial court in the background section. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:52, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * "Preslit, the Soviet Union's arts distribution agency in the United States which was associated with VOKS": Preslit was the literary publishing house of VOKS, not an associated organization. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 17:09, 3 October 2023 (UTC) Spoke too soon. Seems sources conflict as to what Preslit exactly did and what organization it may have been a part of. According to Viktoria Zora, evidence suggests that it worked closely, but apart from VOKS. Your description is accurate, but maybe amend it to "arts distribution and copyright agency" per Zora, just to be sure. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 17:15, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Done. voorts (talk/contributions) 19:52, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Realized I forgot to ping you, @CurryTime7-24. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:13, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the ping! So far, this is looking good. Will ask for some spot checks in a day or two. Please bear with me as I'll be out of town until Monday (PDT), so my availability will be spotty for a bit. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 06:17, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi @CurryTime7-24. Just checking in. Best, voorts (talk/contributions) 21:46, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the ping! Re-reading the article. Will reply in full shortly. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:48, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Spot checks
Thank you for your hard work on this article. At this point I will ask for spot checks to verify your sources and the accuracy of how they're being cited. May I please have the quoted source texts for the following?
 * FN 6 cites "The film, distributed by Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation, was 'Hollywood's first Cold War effort.'"
 * "In 1948, several Soviet composers, including Dmitri Shostakovich, objected to the use of their music in an American spy film, The Iron Curtain, that was distinctly anti-Communist. These soviet composers understandably feared the gulag for appearing in Holywood's first Cold War effort." voorts (talk/contributions) 22:46, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Quibble: maybe either remove the quotation marks from "Hollywood's first Cold War effort" in the article, keep the quotes and attribute the source, or reword that passage to avoid copying the source. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:40, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @CurryTime7-24: Done. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:00, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll be back later tonight (PDT), so please bear with me for just a few more hours. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 22:03, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks for your help improving the article. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:06, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Just checking in again, @CurryTime7-24. Best, voorts (talk/contributions) 21:54, 13 October 2023 (UTC)


 * FN 17 cites the entire paragraph beginning with "That month, Helen Black—head of Preslit". (Citing a span of two pages is fine, but three may inadvertently give the impression of WP:SYNTH. I suggest citing specific pages where required in that paragraph.)
 * voorts (talk/contributions) 22:46, 11 October 2023 (UTC) ✅ voorts (talk/contributions) 23:02, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * FN 11 cites "In May 1948, attorney Charles Recht—who had previously served as the Soviet Union's representative to the United States—filed suit against Fox on behalf of Shostakovich, Khachaturian, Prokofiev, and Myaskovsky, seeking both a temporary and permanent injunction prohibiting distribution of The Iron Curtain."
 * voorts (talk/contributions) 22:46, 11 October 2023 (UTC) "It was in order to prevent the distribution and/or showing of The Iron Curtain in America that Shostakovich and several other Russian composers seized [i.e., sued in] the Court of New York." I also added cites to Tomoff 2015 and to the case itself. The case states that the motion was for an injunction pendente lite (i.e., temporarily) and permanently. Tomoff 2015 discusses Charles Recht; I believe there was originally a cite to Tomoff in that paragraph but things might have been moved around. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:02, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * FN 30 cites "According to law professor Justin Hughes, the privacy claim rested on a right to anonymity and the contention that use of the music constituted a public "distortion" of the composers' beliefs."
 * "On the surface, the plaintiff in each case [including the Shostakovich case, as well as a case involving Dr. Seuss discussed in the article,] claimed that the public use of his name against his will invaded his privacy. Interestingly, this is the reverse of the right to demand that one's name be used publicly with one's work. ... The privacy argument [in the cases] is only one of several distinct privacy arguments." (356)
 * "At first glance, the privacy argument in the Shostakovich and Geisel cases can be taken as an argument for anonymity. Shostakovich's position was that even if his music was used in the movie, he should be able to prevent use of his name. In essence, he presented a claim to stay out of public notice." (357)
 * "These cases presented more than a claim for anonymity and for remaining out of public view; those claims were counterparts of the substantive privacy we have been considering. ... Shostakovich ... opposed publication of a message that could be mistaken as [his]. ... Shostakovich opposed being identified with the substance of an anti-Soviet movie. ... The[is] concern[] do[es] not really fit a privacy argument since nothing private is being revealed. It is a matter of distortion. Such distortion can be attacked through defamation doctrine, but the first amendment might provide another means to protect this interest." (358) voorts (talk/contributions) 22:46, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * FN 41 cites "However, commenters have divided on whether the court properly answered 'the question of whether a composer's integrity can be impaired by a faithful rendition of his song in an objectionable context.'" —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 22:18, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * "Shostakovich raises the question of whether a composer's integrity can be impaired by a faithful rendition of his song in an objectionable context." voorts (talk/contributions) 22:46, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Finished. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:02, 11 October 2023 (UTC)


 * @CurryTime7-24. Just wanted to check in again and see if we can get this closed out. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:19, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll be in later tonight. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 22:13, 16 October 2023 (UTC)