Talk:Mozambican War of Independence

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Mozambican War of Independence is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do.
Article Milestones Date Process Result February 24, 2007 Good article nominee Listed February 25, 2007 WikiProject peer review Reviewed March 15, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted Current Status: Featured article

	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.
FA	This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has had a peer review which is now archived. This article was the project's Collaboration of the Fortnight (January 8, 2007–January 14, 2007). Related task forces (nations and regions): African military history task force

A request has been made to make this article Today's featured article. Please feel free to leave comments.

Contents 1 older entries 2 casualty numbers 3 bantu speakers 4 Good Article - On Hold 5 Slaves 6 Diacrit 7 Sources 8 Redundancy 9 Wikisyntax fighting with itself 10 Early US & UN support 11 Mozambique Liberation Front / FRELIMO 12 Assassination of Mondlane 13 Remaining issues

[edit] older entries

I'm slowly constructing this article as I research the subject, please feel free to contribute anything useful, it will be greatly appreciated! Please discuss majors additions here, or at least make a note of them, thanks. --SGGH 15:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Still to do:

• The sections on the conflict either side of 1969 need to be fleshed out into a full account of the events of the war. However I can't find much info on it and would appreciate anyone helping out with that.
• The results of the assassination in terms of how it shook frelimo, again I can find little on that and would like assisstance please.
• The consequences, how much did the war lead to independence? Was it really more a result of the coup in Portugal?

The above three areas I can't find much on, however I've written the background sections, devealopment program section, and introduction to my satisfaction at the moment--SGGH 14:24, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

You've done a good job with this article SGGH. It looks good: I'm a newcomer, and just getting used to being here. I'll look around and see what I can do. Richiar 13:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] casualty numbers

are you sure about the casualty numbers? usually the colonial power has less soldiers and loses less soldiers. Wandalstouring 17:00, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Its the only information i could find for now, until i get a hold of more reliable information (or someone else does) it will have to do for now, though it did always look a little off.--SGGH 09:03, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] bantu speakers

"Bantu-speaking peoples were the native inhabitants of Mozambique since first and fourth centuries AD"

So, which century was it? Feijuada 13:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

That's a mix-up, i've corrected it now.--SGGH 09:04, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article - On Hold

I've put this article 'on hold' for GA status for the moment. It is very close, but I would prefer to see the 'continuing war' section split up and the relevant parts of it integrated with the 'carnation revolution' section. As things stand I think the structure hinders the clear presentation of the material about the end of the War. The only other comment I'd make is that there are a few noticeable typos. Great work and a fascinating topic! The Land 15:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I've passed the article now this has been addressed. A suggestion: the graphic showing the military expenditure isn't particularly clear (what are the figures that are being displayed? they are labelled as acronyms in Portugese). The Land 23:26, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Slaves

The article states

"...which were provided money and slaves by the British Empire to work in mines and construct railways."

in relation to approx 1881 and the origins of the Mozambican state. Is this correct? It was my understanding that the British abolished all slavery exploits at least half a century earlier? Have changed it to cheap labour.-- Zleitzen^(talk) 14:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Diacrit

Is it really "Emilio Lourenco", not "Emilio Lourenço"? The latter seems more likely. - Jmabel | Talk 16:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Similarly, "Lourenco Matola". - Jmabel | Talk 17:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC) solved SGGH 19:53, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

There is really rather much here cited to Encarta. I'd recommend looking for better citations on these matters. - Jmabel | Talk 17:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

For comments where there are 2 or 3 cites I have removed the encarta one, and found printed works for a couple of others, unfortuantly I don't have access to enough resources personally in order to eliminate the encarta sites totally. SGGH 20:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Redundancy

The section Insurgency under Mondlane (1964-69) circles around and says the same things more than once, for example about "freedom to move". - Jmabel | Talk 17:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I have attempted to remove some of the repitition. SGGH 20:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikisyntax fighting with itself

"On the [[October 10|10^th]] or [[October 11|11^th of October]] [[1966]]": the whole purpose of linking dates is so that they will format correctly for the user's options, but what is done here totally defeats that. - Jmabel | Talk 17:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Both dates are cited by sources, i have removed the wikiness and just left it as text SGGH 19:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Early US & UN support

The section about early US & UN support is a bit unclear (how this fits in with the rest of the story and the larger picture in Africa). Someone might want to expand on this, or link appropriately to an article that does so. - Jmabel | Talk 17:27, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I have expanded it slightly. Will search for ways to do more. SGGH 20:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mozambique Liberation Front / FRELIMO

After first mention of both names, and outside of quotations, shouldn't we stick with either Mozambique Liberation Front or FRELIMO? Right now, we mostly use the latter, but occasionally the former. This seems unnecessarily confusing. - Jmabel | Talk 17:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I have removed all other mentions of MLF other than in the lead, and replaced them with FRELIMO SGGH 19:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Assassination of Mondlane

The article argues with itself. It is unknown who did this, but it was "revealed" that Aginter Press was responsible. - Jmabel | Talk 17:36, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that even reliable sources disagree on this: some argue that he was killed by the Potuguese secret service, others by Frelimo rivals, others still by a combination of the two. So it's not easy to districate this.--Aldux 18:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I have reworded this to make it more clear SGGH 19:57, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Remaining issues

Thanks. Looks like you did well (and rapidly) on those. Here are the remaining in-line remarks I made that should presumably still be addressed:

• "Eduardo Mondlane's successor, President Samora Machel, commented that “the only ones who will really help us. … They have fought armed struggles, and whatever they have learned that is relevant to Mozambique we will use.”" The quoted phrase has no subject.

Done. -- Zleitzen^(talk) 01:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

• "With the initial FRELIMO attacks in Chai Chai": is this distinct from Chai mentioned above? If so, it deserves a link, if not, use the same form of the name.

Done. -- Zleitzen^(talk) 23:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

• "General Costa Gomes": is this Francisco da Costa Gomes? If so, it certainly deserves a link and a brief explanation who he is. If not, still deserves a full name, if only to make it clear this is not that Costa Gomes.
• "Flechas units" needs explanation or link on first mention. Later, when we say "Flechas: a unit similar to the one employed in Angola", that still doesn't say much: it's not as if the average reader will be tremendously more familiar with the Angola war.

Done. -- Zleitzen^(talk) 00:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

• Also, why was SA-7 MANPAD de-linked? Hardly self-explanatory. Eventually needs an article.

Done. I redirected it to Strela 2 -- Zleitzen^(talk) 00:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

- Jmabel | Talk 22:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm assuming it was General Francisco da Costa Gomes, who was a commander at that time. However the article states that he was second in command to Antonio dos Santos - in 1972 - though earlier it says that dos Santos was relieved in 1970. This needs to be clarified. Was it Francisco da Costa Gomes? What was his position, and if he was second in command, who was first in command at the appropriate time? -- Zleitzen^(talk) 23:08, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

The article states "By 1972, however, there was growing pressure from other commanders, particularly Kaúlza de Arriaga's second in command, General Francisco da Costa Gomes" if that answers your question, but it probably states that because you already fixed the issue :D and yes, to my knowledge the above quote from the article is corrent. SGGH 08:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)