Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Angolan Civil War/archive2

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted 00:06, 20 February 2008.

[edit] Angolan Civil War

previous FAC

Check external links

I'm nominating ACW again. It was pretty good last time. Since then I've expanded the 1970s and 1990s sections and added a chunk, as requested, on the origins of the conflict. Jose João (talk) 18:00, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

• Publishers and ISBNs should be added to the book sources. Dead web refs need to be replaced. Epbr123 (talk) 17:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

There's one dead reference. Jose João (talk) 20:12, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

• Comment I personally would order it as "notes" then "references/further reading" rather than "further reading" and then "references" I think the footnotes ought to come before the list of books, at least that is how it is done in any other FA that comes to mind, but it's a suggestion only. SGGH ^speak! 10:17, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
• Comments
  • The lead loses me toward the end. You state that several other "factions" were engaged in the conflict and then mention one other faction (FNLA) and several foreign states that I would not readily describe as "factions". I think I was expecting a prose overview of all the factions involved. The infobox serves as a distraction at this point - you mention Cuba and Mozambique there but they are not mentioned in the lead. In fact, Mozambique is never mentioned in the article...
  • In the Roots heading, I am unclear how the MPLA came to control Cabinda after you said FLEC was operating there. The reader can go off to the main article, but it should at least be summarized properly here.
  • In the second paragraph, you mention "Robert" but the reader has not been introduced to this figure. Mention by full name the first time and provide some context.
  • "Ford told William Colby, the Director of Central Intelligence, to 'go ahead and do it' with an initial US$6 million in funding." Since that's not exactly a compelling or memorable quote, I suggest it is not needed.
  • The manner in which you've chosen to summarize facts from the two main articles in the Clark Amendment heading is rather confusing. For example, you mention Zaire but not why it's relevant. Why was it important that Mobutu Sese Seko would not approve of UNITA support? I was left with questions about why Ford would sign the Clark Amendment after he approved aid. Also, I don't understand what Angola's UN membership has to do with the Clark Amendment. These items might be covered in their respective articles, but they need to be summarized properly here so readers don't have to go elsewhere to understand the basic concepts.
  • On a related note, if you have copied and pasted text from main articles into this one, you need to adjust the context and wikilinking to be appropriate to this article. An example is if a person is mentioned in the copied excerpt and not wikilinked because they were linked elsewhere in the source article, you might need to link them here.
  • In the Vietnam heading, you seem to be implying that the Soviet Union and the US did not want to repeat mistakes that led to the Vietnam War, but it's not stated clearly. I checked the Time Magazine source given and it supports the concept - just needs clarity.
  • "The napalm killed cattle to feed government troops..." Do you mean the troops that were killing 10 year olds were also killing cattle with napalm and then eating the cattle?
  • "The FNLC retreated to Zambia and back to Angola, vowing to return." Which one? Or both?
  • "The Zairian army then forcibly evicted civilians along Shaba's 65-mile (105 km) long border with Angola and Mobutu ordered them to shoot on sight." Ordered whom? To shoot whom? The way this is written is sounds like Mobutu ordered the civilians to shoot.
  • "...he gave Alves the task of once again clamping down on dissension" Use "dissent" instead.
  • In the Nitistas heading, what are the Cabral and Henda Committees?
  • You jump pretty quickly from Neto supporting Alves to being threatened by him. Maybe add a sentence that explains how Alves' actions/successes created a threat to Neto.
  • "After twelve hours of debate, the party voted 26 to 6 to kick Alves and Van-Dunem out of power." The term "kick out" is too informal.
  • "Neto allies like Defense Minister Iko Carreira and MPLA General Secretary Lúcio Lara also irked the Soviet leadership through both for their policies and personalities." Grammar.
  • "With Alves out of the picture, the USSR promoted Prime Minister Lopo do Nascimento, another 'internationalist', against Neto, a 'careerist,' for the MPLA's leadership." I think this is the first time you use "USSR" instead of "Soviet Union". Some readers may not know this is the same thing. Also, avoid using single quotes unless they are inside another quote.
  • General comment: The article is very informative and the prose is good in most places. However, it treads on being too succinct in some places and I get the impression that information was cut out for length's sake. The article is already quite long so it seems logical to identify, as a near-term project, additional material that could be broken off into different articles. A good example would be the Nitistas heading. It could easily be its own article as it begs for more detail and narrative throughout.

I'm out of time but I'm not all the way through this epic narrative - will return with more comments later today or tomorrow. --Laser brain (talk) 15:54, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

• More:
  • When Neto dies you mention Lara and Pascual Luvualo. Who are they and why is it important that they flew to Moscow?
  • The second paragraph of the 1980's heading gives quite a bit of narrative but only has one citation at the end. Does that citation cover everything in the paragraph? There are items there that might be disputed, such as South African plots to set off explosives in Luanda. It is very dicey to make such statements without being individually sourced.
  • "Cuba increased its 35,000-strong troop force in Angola from 35,000 in 1982 to 40,000 in 1985." You don't need to state 35,000 twice.
  • "The government tried unsuccessfully to take UNITA's supply depot in Mavinga from Menongue." Who is Menongue? First time we have heard of him in this article. --Laser brain (talk) 17:33, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
    • 1. Lara and Pascual's occupations are established above, in the Nitistas section. They are significant in how they shaped Angola-Russia relations. 2. The citation covers the entire paragraph. 3. Good point, modified to: "Cuba increased its troop force in Angola..." 4. Menongue is a place, not a person. Jose João (talk) 21:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Oh, I see Lara now. I still don't see Pascual. In any case, it needs rewriting because it reads like a couple named Lara Luvualo and Pascual Luvualo, if you follow. The Menongue sentence also needs rewriting because you say "in Mavinga from Menonque" - sounds like the depot was in a city named Mavinga and they tried to take it from a person named Menongue. Will you be responding to the rest of my comments above? --Laser brain (talk) 02:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

• Closing note: after more than ten days, this article has failed to garner any support. Please work with editors who commented to try to address issues before re-approaching FAC, or consider approaching peer review. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.