Battle of Kampala has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: August 22, 2019. (Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Scale of the battle
edit@Indy beetle: I just wanted to ask whether your sources state that the battle of Kampala was limited to the fighting between 24 and 26 January? Cooper and Fontanellaz effectively treat the actions from 17 January 1986 as part of the overall battle, though they don't outright state that the battle lasted from 17 to 26 January either. Applodion (talk) 18:11, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Applodion: Kainerugaba refers to it as a "two day" battle, which could only be 24–26 January. Kutesa frames it in the larger 17–26 January operation, but his writing is less detailed, so I stuck with what I thought was the better source. I really don't care much about how large a timeframe we use; deference to Cooper and Fontanellaz would be understandable (both are professional and apolitical historians, Kainerugaba obviously did his research but definitely writes from a pro-NRA point of view). Either way we should cover the 17–24 January events in good detail. -Indy beetle (talk) 01:45, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Kampala/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: CPA-5 (talk · contribs) 19:27, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
Damn Indy, long time no see right? If you do not mind then I'd review this one? Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 19:27, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
- @CPA-5: Any progress on the review? -Indy beetle (talk) 20:15, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
- Not really I was on holiday for two weeks I will now start with my review. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 18:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
- and captured the city of Kampala, Uganda Current countries shouldn't be linked.
- Unlinked.
- Okello fled in a helicopter and flew to Sudan Same as above.
- Unlinked.
- was sworn in as President of Uganda Link the title.
- Done.
- In August the NRA launched a series of coordinated attacks American coordinated.
- Fixed.
- In the autumn of 1985, the NRA laid siege Try to avoid to use seasons in the article.
- Revised.
- Museveni President and Vice-President of Uganda Link Vice-President of Uganda.
- Done.
- At the same time, the NRA's 9th and 19th Battalions Link both the 9th and the 19th Battalions.
- Though as large combat formations they could technically qualify under notability per MilHist guidelines, I don't think there's enough info about them, especially outside Kainerugaba's book or the engagements they participated in, to make it worth red-linking them with the expectation that they'll become articles in the future.
- including the Former Uganda National Army (FUNA) and the Uganda Freedom Army Link both the Former Uganda National Army and the Uganda Freedom Army.
- Done.
- The NRA's 1st, 3rd, 5th and 11th Battalions moved Link all the Battalions here. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 11:48, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
- Same as I wrote above applies here.
More to come
- while the 7th Battalion traveled down Hoima Road American travelled.
- Britified.
- was hauling a 37 mm anti-aircraft gun No English units?
- I was under the impression that using metric units was sufficient for weapon descriptions.
- Okello fled via helicopter to Sudan with several members Unlink Sudan because I think MOS tries to tell us we shan't link current countries.
- Done.
- fortifying the crossings of the Nile to prevent Unlink Nile because of common term.
- Done.
- He soon joined the fledgling National Resistance Movement American fledgling.
- Revised.
- which constituted the second largest ethnic group in the UNLA Second largest needs any hyphen.
- Done.
- Suspected to harbor NRA fighters American harbor.
- Fixed.
I'll continue the source's, image's and infobox's part. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 15:21, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Images
- Looks fine.
Sources
- Ref 23, no link and needs an access-date?
- I retrieved that through my university's database (and, if I recall, specifically through ProQuest), which can't be linked to (since the whole network is password protected). And since its an archived version of a print copy and there's no link to maintain, there is no point in adding an access-date.
- Does that means that the rest of the refs in this source review are also archives in ProQuest? Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 14:39, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- I have just finished adding access-dates to all of the sources I retrieved from normal links online. The rest have come from ProQuest or other databases as archived copies. -Indy beetle (talk) 21:28, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- Ref 26, Same as above and needs an access-date.
- ^^
- Ref 27, needs an access-date.
- Ref 32, same as above.
- Ref 42, same as above.
- Ref 43, no link and needs an access-date?
- Ref 45, same as above.
- Ref 46, same as above.
- Ref 49, same as above.
- Standardise ISBNs, some of them have hyphens in their ISBNs and some don't.
- Hyphenated.
Infobox
- Are there links for all the commanders?
- None that I know of.
- Are there links for all the units?
- None that I've found.
That's anything. Place it on hold. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 10:56, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- @CPA-5: I think I've responded to everything. -Indy beetle (talk) 22:28, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
- Okay I think this one is ready to go, I'll pass it. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 08:04, 22 August 2019 (UTC)