Template:Did you know nominations/Law Against Rehabilitation of Nazism

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 12:25, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Law Against Rehabilitation of Nazism

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that while the Russian government compares the Law Against Rehabilitation of Nazism, a 2014 memory law, to other laws against Holocaust denial, its critics point to chilling effects on freedom of speech, and accuse the government of trying to rewrite history? http://www.ponarseurasia.org/sites/default/files/policy-memos-pdf/Pepm331_Kurilla_August2014_0.pdf https://books.google.com/books?id=2S42DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA207 https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/10/02/first-they-came-for-the-holocaust-deniers-and-i-did-not-speak-out/ https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/07/18/online-and-all-fronts/russias-assault-freedom-expression
  • ALT1:... that while Russia's government compares the Law Against Rehabilitation of Nazism to other laws on Holocaust denial, critics point to its effects on freedoms and rewriting history? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
  • ALT2:... that Russia's Law Against Rehabilitation of Nazism, compared to laws on Holocaust denial, was used to prosecute people discussing German–Soviet cooperation?

• Reviewed: Chen Xiaolu

Created by Piotrus (talk). Self-nominated at 10:42, 8 March 2018 (UTC).

• Unfortunately, the hook is significantly longer than the 200-character limit. I've experimented with shortening it as is, to preserve what's in the hook, and came up with: "that while Russia's government compares the Law Against Rehabilitation of Nazism to other laws on Holocaust denial, critics point to its effects on freedoms and its potential rewriting of history?" Not sure this is the perfect ALT, and in any case I feel Piotrus should first review it or propose another ALT (maybe something on how the law was used to prosecute those describing the Nazi--Soviet collaboration of 1939--1941? surely that is not how Holocaust denial laws in other countries are supposed to work). Article is new, long enough, and properly written. Earwig's gives only a false positive for a small portion of the text were the law is quoted verbatim, with quotation marks -- so no, no plagiarism. The hook is verified by the sources, and, duh, interesting. Dahn (talk) 07:34, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

• @Dahn: Proposed alt1 and alt 2. Thanks for the suggestions! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:37, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Great. All verified, ALT2 preferred. QPQ also verifies, incidentally. Dahn (talk) 08:43, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

• Hi, I came by to promote ALT2, but the word "persecute" does not sound neutral. The blogger was convicted, not persecuted. I also changed the word "persecute" in the article, referring to a different case, to "investigated". Yoninah (talk) 20:30, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

• Perhaps you mean "prosecute" in the hook? Yoninah (talk) 21:43, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

• @Yoninah and Dahn: Indeed, that's what I meant. Sorry for the typo. I've changed the word in the hook, I hope it is fine now? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:03, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

• Thank you. Restoring tick per Dahn's review. Yoninah (talk) 12:23, 12 April 2018 (UTC)