Talk:Battle of Quifangondo

Battle of Quifangondo 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: May 8, 2020. (Reviewed version).

This article is written in South African English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: African / Cold War This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles Associated task forces: /  African military history task force Cold War task force (c. 1945 – c. 1989) Africa: Angola / DRC / South Africa Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Angola (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Democratic Republic of the Congo (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject South Africa (assessed as Low-importance). Portugal Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Portugal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Portugal on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PortugalWikipedia:WikiProject PortugalTemplate:WikiProject PortugalPortugal articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Portugal To-do: edit history watch purge Find correct name The airport is not listed as João Paulo II anywhere. The airport's own website calls itself simply Ponta Delgada, and has no mention of João Paulo. Improve key articles to Good article Portugal Lisbon Improve Os Lusíadas Coat of arms of Portugal More... Review Category:History of Portugal: lots to remove there Template:Regions of Portugal: statistical (NUTS3) subregions and intercommunal entities are confused; they are not the same in all regions, and should be sublisted separately in each region: intermunicipal entities are sometimes larger and split by subregions (e.g. the Metropolitan Area of Lisbon has two subregions), some intercommunal entities are containing only parts of subregions. All subregions should be listed explicitly and not assume they are only intermunicipal entities (which accessorily are not statistic subdivisions but real administrative entities, so they should be listed below, probably using a smaller font: we can safely eliminate the subgrouping by type of intermunicipal entity from this box). Requests See Requested articles Assess Help assessing articles. Need images Translate from Portuguese Wikipedia Wikify Vote: Watch this list — Edit this list Cuba Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cuba, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cuba related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CubaWikipedia:WikiProject CubaTemplate:WikiProject CubaCuba articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Cuba task list: edit history watch purge Task list New article announcements: Ambrosio Cave, Calero Cave, Centella Cave, Cuba and the United Nations, Cuban Liberation Army, Cuevas de Punta del Este, Cura Cave, Patana Cave, Pluma Cave Stubs: Dollar store (Cuba) Verify: History of Cuba, Fulgencio Batista Nochebuena NPOV: Armando Valladares, Delfín Fernández, History of Cuba Copyedit: Armando Peraza, Bay of Pigs Invasion, Fabio Grobart, Julio Antonio Mella War against the Bandits Style: Fidel Castro Expand: Cuba–Soviet Union relations, Baseball in Cuba, Religion in Cuba, Havana's International Book Fair, Cuba–Venezuela relations, Antonio Sánchez de Bustamante y Sirven

The source I've cited indicates that "Nshila wa Lufu" literally means "Death Road", a phrase that subsequent to this battle, has become associated with Quifangondo. Please discuss here if you feel otherwise. Socrates2008 (Talk) 21:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The MPLA numbers are missing, as are references for the numbers currently cited. Socrates2008 (Talk) 09:51, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a separate 74-75 phase in the Angolan conflict is an artificial academic construct by one author, against the norm followed by other historians who correctly distitingush between two phases: the

. It is certainly not for the lede, as it only confuses readers for two reasons:

• 1. the term "decolonisation" is historically associated with the struggles for independence, so in this case, the Angolan War of Independence;
• 2. the text clearly says it is "the first battle in the Angolan Civil War", also identified as such in the infobox as "Part of The Angolan Civil War".

It is one or the other, it can't be both. Unfortunately the editor who made this change keeps repeating it elsewhere. Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 12:13, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA toolbox
Copyvio detector Authorship External links
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions

This review is

transcluded from Talk:Battle of Quifangondo/GA1

. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Catlemur (talk · contribs) 21:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will begin the review tomorrow.--Catlemur (talk) 21:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If the information is already mentioned and referenced in the main body of the article, you don't have to duplicate the refs in the infobox. E.g. Santos e Castro being a commander in the battle.

Fixed!

Same goes for the lede.

Fixed!

"a hill which overlooked the Luanda highway and only five kilometres from Quifangondo." - Clarify this sentence.

Added “located” before “only five kilometers from Quifangondo”.

Use the convert template to convert km distances into miles.

This might seem nitpicky but article is written using South African and Commonwealth spellings, orthography, and units, as this is the dialect used in all but two of the primary sources (Tucker and Stockwell). Is the conversion to miles really necessary?

The conversion is for the convenience of readers from around the globe. I've been requested to do the same when I nominated an article of mine for GAN in the past.--Catlemur (talk) 08:47, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You mention that a number of Zairean troops were injured in the battle, but the same isn't done in the infobox.

Fixed!

Add a single sentence at the end of the article, stating that the war went on because FALA continued to resist until 2002.--Catlemur (talk) 12:02, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed!

Guimaraes, Fernando Andresen - Is Andressen a first name?

I think Fernando is, but since the author’s name is cited as such in the source material I included it verbatim. Granted, I don’t know anything about Lusophone naming conventions.

James III, W. Martin (2011) and James, W. Martin (2011) - Is this the same person? If so correct it.

Yes, it is the same person but a formatting error occurs every time I add the “III” to the second source in my citations, probably because the format can’t differentiate between the two sources since they were both written by the same author in the same year.

Does this qualify as a last stand battle?

No, and that category has been removed.

Thanks for all your helpful commentary and input, @Catlemur:! --Katangais (talk) 00:27, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If you have two different sources by the same author in the same year, the convention is to append a letter after the year, for example changing the year field to '2011a' or '2011b' so that the sfns work. Kges1901 (talk) 00:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The second James ref was not needed after all.--Catlemur (talk) 21:18, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (

   lists

   ):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (

   reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism

   ):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass:

   Well done.--Catlemur (talk) 21:18, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]