Template:Did you know nominations/General Alliance against Racism and for Respect for French and Christian Identity

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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:28, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

General Alliance against Racism and for Respect for French and Christian Identity[edit]

(

)

... that the General Alliance against Racism and for Respect for French and Christian Identity sued Le Figaro for defamation against Catholics? Source: "The AGRIF took Halter and the Figaro to court, claiming that these statements defamed Catholics" Source, p 72, middle "The well-known Jewish writer Marek Halter and Le Figaro were convicted on 9 December 1993 for a "public and racist libel"...The writer and the paper" were sued by an organization called AGRIF Source

Reviewed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know_nominations/FESTIMA
Comment: Interesting because the law was initially considered to protect vulnerable minorities, not the majority. The most interesting fact is that they won the case, but this was a long process and I can't find one source that sums up this briefly and adequately.

Created by Iselilja (talk). Self-nominated at 17:38, 31 January 2018 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook eligibility:

Cited:
Interesting:
Other problems:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: ~~The World Politics quote is actually on page 20, not 72.~~ ~~In the article the citation should ideally be directly after the fact, e.i. after "... and anti-semitic.'"~~ It would have been more interesting if the hook stated more clearly the irony of the lawsuit, e.i. the Catholics were a powerful majority group. But this would probably make the hook too long. Farang Rak Tham (talk) 13:34, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the review and for putting up the talk page which I had ignored. I have rewritten the paragraph that included the hook fact, and the first line in the paragraph now says, I think, pretty much the same as the hook, and has inline citation right after the fact. As for page numbers: I am using the page numbers from the World Politics journal, where this article makes up pages 53 to 85. When I first started reading the article, it was open access and I have downloaded it, and it has these page numbers. I see the article unfortunately no longer has open access, so you had to use Sci-hub and there the article starts at page 1, but that's "unofficial" page numbering I think. Sorry for the inconvenience. I included pages 20-21 as an alternative in the citation in article. As for the hook, I believe saying "powerful, majority group" might constitute "editorializing" and I think it goes without saying that Catholics are the traditional majority in France. Otherwise, I agree that the hook could have been better, so I would certainly be open for suggestions, but the length of the name makes it difficult to say a lot (unless you shorten the name to AGRIF and only pipe the full name). Iselilja (talk) 22:03, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Looks good to me. It is allowed to use paywalled sources, no inconvenience caused. Passing.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 09:30, 8 February 2018 (UTC)