Jump to content

Talk:Battle of Jinja/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: AustralianRupert (talk · contribs) 06:52, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]


G'day, I will take a look at this article's GA nomination. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:52, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have the following comments/observations: AustralianRupert (talk) 07:12, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Uganda is overlinked in the lead
    • Fixed.
  • Nyerere is mentioned in the lead, but not in the body
    • Removed.
  • electricity to all of Ugandan --> "electricity to all of Uganda"
    • Fixed.
  • in the Background section, suggest maybe splitting the second paragraph, as it seems quite long
    • Done.
  • in the Citations, "Erich Wiedermann" --> "Wiedermann, Erich" for consistency of presentation
    • Done.
  • in the Citations, some of the web citations have accessdates, and others don't. For example, compare # 23 with # 26 -- is there a reason for this?
    • Access date added to NYT citation. I've not included access dates for articles which are simply uploaded pictures of the original pages. The Daily Monitor articles are typically published originally on the web, and the NYT and WashPost articles are uploaded scanned text from the originals.
  • in the References, is there an ISSN or OCLC for the Matatu work?
    • There probably is, but because the name of the journal and publisher is so generic I've been unable to pinpoint a number.
  • Uganda Army soldiers --> "Ugandan Army soldiers"? (there are a few examples of this construction to check)
    • "Uganda Army" was the official name of the country's military at the time.
      • No worries. If/where possible I'd suggest working around it (e.g. "Uganda Army troops" --> "Ugandan troops" maybe if it isn't ambiguous), but it is not a war stopper in the circumstances, just seems jarring to my ear. AustralianRupert (talk) 06:04, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • 70mm recoilless rifles (and other similar examples) -- add a non breaking space between the number and the unit symbol per MOS:UNITSYMBOLS
    • Done.
  • and large stocks of weapons.[24][11]: suggest ordering the refs numerically
    • Done.
  • there is a mixture of English variation in the article, for example "armoured" (Britsh), but "defense" (US). Either is fine for this topic, IMO, but it should be consistent throughout the article
    • Should be all British now.
  • was the conquer of the --> "was the conqueror of the..."
    • Fixed.
  • it would be great if more information about casualties, and Uganadan units/commanders could be found, but I understand that there is a lack of this sort of information available at this stage
    • Very little information on the Ugandan side of the war exists, and this is especially true for a battle in this later stage. The only known casualties are the unspecified number of Ugandan soldiers summarily executed after capture and the one sergeant found dead in the city.
  • link battalion, tank, machine gun, howitzer
    • Done.
  • in the References, is there a translation that could be provided for the title of the Mzirai work?
    • "Kuzama" roughly translates to "sinking" or "immersing", but I'm not quite sure what the author intends to be the true meaning of his title, so I'm hesitant to affirm a translation. He could mean the "Sinking/Fall of Idi Amin" or "Immersion in [the topic of] Idi Amin"; I do not know.
  • images appear correctly licenced (no action required)
  • referencing appears adequate to me for GA standards (no action required)
  • regarding the Daily Monitor, is this source considered relatively reliable?
    • The Daily Monitor is a large, private, online national news outlet for Uganda. A Google search shows that it has been cited by well-published books and scholarly sources for Ugandan topics. It has sister printed publications, such as the Sunday Monitor. Most of the Daily Monitor material on the Uganda-Tanzania War is written by Henry Lubega and Faustin Mugabe, both of whom seem to be typical staff writers. Lubega's articles have also been reprinted in the Tanzanian press. Both of them seem quite reliable journalists, and I do recall on one occasion Lubega referencing a visit to a military museum in Tanzania and looking at the TPDF's official history, so it's clear they do their research. I exercise caution on a case-by-case basis when they print large, unedited interviews/essays by involved subjects, such as veterans of the war.
  • the external link checker tool isn't working, but I manually checked each link and they appear to be working as advertised (no action required)
@AustralianRupert: I've responded to your comments. -Indy beetle (talk) 00:11, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, Indy, your changes look good. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 00:21, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Battle_of_Jinja/GA1&oldid=893692078"