Wikipedia:Peer review/Battle of Quifangondo/archive1

Battle of Quifangondo

I've listed this article for peer review because I'm trying to get it to GA status. Right now there are 15 GA-class articles listed for WikiProject Angola and 14 of them are articles about animal species endemic throughout southern Africa. A new GA-class article on an Angolan-specific topic like this one (a pivotal battle of the civil war) would be lekker.

Thanks, Katangais (talk) 23:28, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

• I think this article is well balanced and resourced and definitely a good candidate for GA status! BoonDock (talk) 19:54, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Comment from Brigade Piron

I have been asked to comment by Katangais. I'm have not yet had a chance to read the article properly (I look forward to doing so!) but I have some provisional comments about referencing which are flagged by the ref plugin. I have fixed one myself, but the following remain broken:

• Domingos 2015
• Chabal 2002
• Hamann 2001

I would also suggest segregating the "References" section to leave only texts that are currently cited in the article. The others could be moved to a "Further Reading" section.—Brigade Piron (talk) 10:33, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, BP. Thanks for catching those referencing errors! I fixed the three broken refs you mentioned above, and axed the additional three that were in the ref list but didn't end up getting cited. --Katangais (talk) 17:34, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Comments from AustralianRupert: G'day, thanks for your efforts with this article. Unfortunately, I can't comment on content, but on the surface it looks pretty good to me. I have a few minor suggestions to polish the article: AustralianRupert (talk) 10:50, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

• "File:Battle of quifangondo.JPG": I wonder if it would be possible to have this map translated into English? You might be able to request this at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop
• "File:War museum ZiS-3.JPG": might be better presented as a left aligned image so that it points into the article
• South Africa's subsequent delivery of 3 medium guns --> "South Africa's subsequent delivery of three medium guns" per MOS:NUMERAL
• suggest left aligning "File:FNLA1973.jpg"
• suggest left aliging "File:Canberra no. 458 a.jpg"
• suggest right aligning "File:Raketa 122mm M-21.JPG"
• "South Africa had suffered" --> had is probably unnecessary here (same in this regard to similar constructions which probably don't need the extra word)
• "suffered 1 wounded", "suffered 5 dead" --> "one" and "five" per MOS:NUMERAL (there are similar constructions that probably need the same treatment)
• "At 6:00 P.M. that day" --> "At 6:00 p.m. that day" per MOS:TIME
• "with the 106mm recoilless rifles" --> "with the 106  mm recoilless rifles"
• "delivered to Angola–possibly" --> spaced emdash or unspaced endash per WP:DASH (there are a few other examples of similar constructions that also should be adjusted in the same regard)
• in the Bibliography is there an ISBN or OCLC number for Cascudo source
• suggest sorting the References list alphabetically by the author's surname
• are there ISSNs or the newspaper and journal articles cited in the References list?

Hi @AustralianRupert:, I made all the minor fixes you suggested with the exception of the map, the translation of which I've requested. Thanks for your input! Let me know if there's anything I missed. --Katangais (talk) 21:48, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

G'day, nice work. Sorry, I just noticed one other that I missed earlier - citation # 16 "James 2011" is showing a harvnb error (it isn't clear which James 2011 reference it relates to in the Bibliography). Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:41, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Fixed! --Katangais (talk) 22:19, 3 March 2020 (UTC)