Wikipedia

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Lukaya

< Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history‎ | Assessment

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted by Kges1901 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 11:20, 27 April 2019 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Battle of Lukaya edit

Instructions for nominators and reviewers

Nominator(s): Indy beetle (talk) and Applodion (talk)

Battle of Lukaya (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox

The Battle of Lukaya was the largest engagement of the Uganda–Tanzania War, and one of the most significant. After briefly occupying the town of Lukaya near an important causeway, Tanzanian and Ugandan rebel forces were driven away by Libyan rocket fire. Fearing a reversal in their campaign, the Tanzanians orchestrated a successful counterattack, inflicting heavy casualties upon the Libyan and Ugandan government forces and retaking the town. Several observers have recognised it as a key turning point in the war, whereafter the Uganda Army failed to provide any significant resistance to its Tanzanian enemies. Unlike other articles about battles of this war, enough sources have been found to provide ample explanation of both the Tanzanian and Ugandan perspectives of this conflict, and additional details have been found in a Swahili language book. It has passed a GA review, and I am confident that it is ready for the A-class process. Indy beetle (talk) 03:05, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by CPA-5 edit

I'll do this one tomorrow. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 20:36, 27 March 2019 (UTC) Okay let me see.[reply]

  • Unlink Uganda, Tanzania, United Nations, Arab League
    • Not sure why this is necessary, they seem to be quite relevant pages that would be helpful for our readers, even if the first three are well-known.
  • Hmm Uganda, Tanzania and the Arab League can be linked but I don't think that the United Nations should be linked because it is an everyday use so everyone knows who're the UN is/are. Cheers.
  • Entebbe to assist the Ugandan army. Ugandan Army and link it too.
    • Done.
  • other large artillery pieces, such as 122mm mortars no space between 122 and mm.
    • Done.
  • which was 60 kilometres (37 mi) northwest of the town "American northwest".
    • I'm not sure what you're getting at. I was under the impression that "northwest" was an acceptable compound word for a direction.
  • It is but a lot of people don't know that "northwest" is an American English word. British English uses the hyphen version or uses it as two words. Cheers.
  • Done.
  • Ref 37, pp. 5186–5187. --> pp. 5,186–5,187.
    • The sfn parameter for pages interprets commas as a break in different pages being cited, thus it renders as the following: "pp. 5, 186–5, 187".
  • Fair enough. Cheers.
  • Can you translate Mzirai's book title "Kuzama kwa Idi Amin"?
    • "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.
  • I guess those translators websites need an update in the African languages. Cheers.
  • suggest ordering the refs numerically here.
  • Nobody was killed in the action.[22][18]
  • Ugandans and Libyans from Kampala.[28][27]
  • on the Ugandan-Libyan force.[27][19] Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 07:32, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's everyting from me. CPA-5 (talk) 18:12, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@CPA-5: I've responded to your comments. -Indy beetle (talk) 03:56, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Gog the Mild edit

  • I have made a few copy edits which you will want to check.
  • Note c: "UNLF troops had conducted a "tactical retreat" at the town". "at" -> 'from'.
    • Done.
  • Note e: You have several short quotes or individual words as quotes. It is not clear (to me) who is being quoted nor what the insertion of the quotes adds. I would suggest leaving the text as is, but removing the quote marks. If you prefer not to, you will need to cite each one directly after each quote, and attribute some inline in line with MOS:QUOTE - "The reader must be able to determine the source of any quotation, at the very least via a footnote. The source must be named in article text if the quotation is an opinion".
    • I've cleaned up some of the problematic areas, removing quotes where unnecessary or adding citations and attribution. IF there are any more concerns could you list the specific problems?
  • That looks MOS compliant to me.
  • "instability fermented in the armed forces" I am honestly unclear as to what "instability fermented" is supposed to convey. Could you elaborate or rephrase?
    • Changed to "instability manifested".
  • "One Ugandan soldier stated in an interview with Drum". Could Drum be briefly introduced at this point?
    • Done.
  • "The TPDF's 207th Brigade was dispatched down through the swamp to the east". I am not sure why "down" is in this sentence. A typo?
    • Word removed.
  • "would be soon defeated". 'would soon be defeated' would read better.
    • Done.
  • Tank photo caption. Are you quite sure that Uganda used "M4A1 Sherman tanks"? It seems improbable. I understood that they were ex-Israeli M4A1(76)Ws.
    • @Applodion: has the book with that information. -Indy beetle (talk) 03:15, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Gog the Mild: The authors do not specify which sub-type of M4A1 tanks was used at Lukaya; it seems quite probable that they meant the Israeli variant, but simply used the more common name "Sherman". Applodion (talk) 07:24, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • You can only go with what the sources say, so fair enough.

That's all I could find. A nice piece of work.

Gog the Mild (talk) 20:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting, informative, well written and easy to digest article. Happy to support. Gog the Mild (talk) 08:21, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by AustralianRupert edit

Support: G'day, Indy, nice work as always. Just a few minor observations/suggestions from me: AustralianRupert (talk) 11:40, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • the Featured article tool checker isn't working, so I wasn't able to check alt text, dabs or the ext links, sorry (no action required)
  • there are no duplicate links (no action required)
  • in the Background, In 1971 Colonel Idi Amin launched a...: suggest adding "Ugandan Colonel Idi Amin"
    • I think it's a given that Amin was a Ugandan colonel. Coups are almost always undertaken by and install internal actors, not foreigners. Otherwise it would be necessary to specify.
      • Fair enough, although, that doesn't hold true all the time, of course. Many coups have had foreign influences in the Cold War period. This source, for instance, discusses some aspects: [1]. AustralianRupert (talk) 04:35, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • Hence me say install internal actors; the British and Israelis are rumoured to have supported the Ugandan coup, but, especially during the Cold War, foreign powers tried (though often failed) to keep their name away from such subversive activities. -Indy beetle (talk) 06:23, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Citation # 61 (Summary of World Broadcasts), is there a page number, and an ISBN or OCLC for this work?
  • in the References, is there an ISBN or OCLC for the Reid source?
    • ISBN added.
  • in the References, capitalisation: "The Tanzanian People's Defence Force : an exercise in nation-building" --> "The Tanzanian People's Defence Force: An Exercise in Nation-building"?
    • Done.
  • in the References, Reid is out of order (alphabetically)
    • Fixed
  • there is a mixture of English variation, for instance "defence" and "harbour" (British English) and "maneuver", "honor" and "labeled" (US). Either variation is probably fine for this topic, but it should be consistent
    • Should all be British now
  • the Uganda Army --> "the Ugandan Army"?
    • "Uganda Army" was the official name of the country's military at the time.
      • Ok, but it is quite jarring to the ear. I'd suggest where possible working around this anomaly. For instance, "Uganda Army soldiers" could become "Ugandan soldiers" in some instances, unless it causes ambiguity with the Ugandan rebels. Minor issue, though, no doubt. AustralianRupert (talk) 04:35, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • are there any other images that might be used in the second half of the article, to break up the text?
    • Map showing battles of the war added to the second half of the article.
@AustralianRupert: I have responded to your comments. -Indy beetle (talk) 03:15, 21 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Images:

Sources:

  • the sources used appear of high quality and reliable, albeit there has not been a huge amount written about this battle. The memoir is used carefully and isn't being used for anything exceptional. GTG. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:01, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Battle_of_Lukaya&oldid=894360683"