Talk:Red Famine
Appearance
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Tarik Amar review
[edit]The Tarik Amar review was cited as evidence that “most” academic reviews of this book were negative. Academic Taras Kuzio wrote a negative review of that review, and it makes some convincing points.
Tarik Amar appears to be a contractor or employee of Russian state propaganda outfit RT. I have not yet read the entirety of either article, but Amar should probably be reviewed as a dubious source. —Michael Z. 04:33, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
- I concur. We should start by summarizing the reviews in mainstream (major) academic journals. Genocide Studies and Prevention, Europe-Asia Studies, New Eastern Europe all probably have more impact IMHO than Kyiv-Mohyla Humanities Journal or Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History. Europe-Asia Studies certainly is a major publication, based on indexing. Not that I am opposed to summarizing the reviews in KMHJ or Kritika. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:29, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Categories:
- Stub-Class Book articles
- WikiProject Books articles
- Stub-Class Germany articles
- Low-importance Germany articles
- WikiProject Germany articles
- Stub-Class Soviet Union articles
- Low-importance Soviet Union articles
- Stub-Class Russia articles
- Low-importance Russia articles
- Low-importance Stub-Class Russia articles
- WikiProject Russia articles
- Stub-Class Russia (history) articles
- History of Russia task force articles
- WikiProject Soviet Union articles