Misplaced Pages

Talk:Angolan Civil War: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:34, 3 December 2007 editPerspicacite (talk | contribs)6,334 edits Inexplicable reverts by User:Perspicacite: Moving spam to talkpage.← Previous edit Revision as of 16:10, 5 December 2007 edit undoNeilN (talk | contribs)134,455 editsm Reverted 1 edit by Perspicacite; Was not spam. using TWNext edit →
Line 129: Line 129:
::Really? How do you know the tank was in Glamoc? I added it based on what I found at the Spanish Misplaced Pages. ] 06:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC) ::Really? How do you know the tank was in Glamoc? I added it based on what I found at the Spanish Misplaced Pages. ] 06:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
:::The winter-weight, rather un-Cuban-looking uniforms and the residual snow at higher elevations on the hillsides tipped me off, and the summary on the image page (]) confirmed it. I've also gone and removed the images from es.wikipedia. ] ] 06:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC) :::The winter-weight, rather un-Cuban-looking uniforms and the residual snow at higher elevations on the hillsides tipped me off, and the summary on the image page (]) confirmed it. I've also gone and removed the images from es.wikipedia. ] ] 06:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

==Inexplicable reverts by ]==
Is there a justifiable reason for removing the conversion template (that converts metric measurements to US measure amongst other conversions) from our article?

These are the two (unexplained) reversions: and

Normally, I would ask the reverter, but he consistently removes my questions without appropriate response (eg: ) and I really don't wish to engage in an edit war. Equally I can not imagine what is controversial and unacceptable about providing alternative measurements. ] 16:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
:The edits by Alice.S seem bonafide to me. --] (]) 17:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

=== Questions for ]===
Your very first upon returning from a was to revert your fellow editors again with an edit summary of: ''"rv, mix of vandalism and unexplained removal of references (also vandalism?)".

Please would you now quickly tell us exactly
# which references were removed (use the <nowiki><nowiki></nowiki></nowiki> mark-up to precisely specify here)
# what the "vandalism" was
# why you have removed the conversion template (that converts metric measurements to US measure amongst other conversions) from our article ''again''? ] 22:30, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
:Let's see...
*Number one, you are one person so you should not be referring to yourself ].
*Number two, you shouldnt be editing this article because..
**a. You clearly are unfamiliar with Angola and Angolan history
**b. You ] here to ].
*This was vandalism. Do you really want to dispute that that's vandalism? Really? ] 22:41, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

:Please would you answer the questions so that we can progress. Either references were removed or they were not. If you do not address yourself to the 3 questions I posed, it must be assumed that your edit summary was false and you will then require alternative justifications for your revert(s). ] 22:52, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
::Please refrain from restoring vandalism to ] and using a sockpuppet to vandalize Angolan Civil War. If you continue, you will be blocked. ] 22:57, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
:::Please answer the questions so that we can progress. Either references were removed or they were not. If you do not address yourself to the 3 questions I posed, it will be assumed that your edit summary was false and you are just attempting diversionary tactics. You have made and if I have indeed been engaging in the sins you describe, they will deal with it. Until then, if you can not answer any of the three questions I posed above '''you will require alternative justifications for your revert(s)'''. ] 23:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
::::You really should have been banned when you knowingly restored vandalism to Rhodesia. If you get away with it here, I will ]. ] 23:31, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
:::::I am not aware of knowingly restoring vandalism on our ] article. Now would you please stick to this article and your reversions and please answer the questions so that we can progress. Either references were removed or they were not. If you do not '''now''' address yourself to the 3 questions I posed, your edit summary was false and you are just attempting diversionary tactics. You have made and if I have indeed been restoring vandalism , they will deal with it. Until then, if you can not answer any of the three questions I posed above '''you will require alternative justifications for your revert(s)'''. ] 23:45, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Despite not being able to provide any justification for damaging and inexplicable reverts, edit warring has continued today: ] 18:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
:{{test3}} ] 18:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
::Perspicacite ''alias'' Jose João: That template is not intended to be used on article discussion pages (or for regular users either). Please specify exactly what the vandalism was that you believe you were countering when you reverted '''again''' and why you keep removing relevant cited information and useful conversion templates. ] 18:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:10, 5 December 2007

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Angolan Civil War article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2
Good articleAngolan Civil War has been listed as one of the History 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 24, 2007Good article nomineeListed
October 27, 2007Good article reassessmentKept
November 18, 2007Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Good article
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconMilitary history: African
WikiProject iconThis 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
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
African military history task force
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconCuba Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Cuba, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cuba related articles on Misplaced Pages. 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
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Cuba task list:

Task list

WikiProject iconSouth Africa
WikiProject icon
  • flagSouth Africa portal
  • This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa
    ???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
    Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
    WikiProject iconAfrica
    WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Misplaced Pages. 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
    ???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
    This page in a nutshell: We are publishing selections of Misplaced Pages articles for offline use in Kiwix releases, in print, or for distribution on flash drives/memory cards. Most of the work is organized off wiki.Shortcuts
    Misplaced Pages 1.0 — (talk)
    FAQTo do
    Release version tools
    Guide(talk)(stats)
    Article selection process
    (talk)
    Version 0.8 bot selection
    Version 0.8 feedback
    IRC channel (IRC)

    Release criteria
    Review team (FAQ)
    Version 0.8 release
    (manual selection) (t)
    "Selection" project (Talk)

    schools selection
    Offline WP for Indian Schools


    CORE TOPICS
    CORE SUPPLEMENT
    Core topics - 1,000
    (Talk) (COTF) (bot)
    TORRENT (Talk)
    "Selection" project for kids ((t))
    WORK VIA WIKI
    PROJECTS
    (talk)
    Pushing to 1.0 (talk)

    Static content subcom.

    This is the Version 1.0 Editorial Team page.

    General background

    Article ratings assessment scheme

    In late 2003, Misplaced Pages co-founder Jimmy Wales had proposed making an offline release version of Misplaced Pages. This group was formed in late 2004 to meet this challenge. Our work involves identifying and organizing articles, and improving and maintaining a core set. Our work does not hinder the existing wiki process for creating and editing articles, but rather it supports that work by providing additional organization. We aim to produce collections that can be used in places where the internet coverage is expensive or non-existent. Our early collections were distributed via DVD; now these are shared via download, then distributed on hardware such as a Raspberry Pi. Originally, only a fixed selection was available, but there is now much flexibility in how selections can be made. This project is now mainly one point in a network of groups who collect and distribute open educational resources from the Internet in an offline form.

    See these more detailed related articles:

    How you can help

    Main page: Misplaced Pages:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/To do

    You are encouraged to join us and help out with one of the projects, or to discuss Misplaced Pages 1.0 on the talk page. A significant part of our work centers around maintaining the assessment scheme, which is now used on more than seven million articles by over 1000 active WikiProjects on the English Misplaced Pages. It is also being used on other language projects. Generally work on this team is sporadic – periods of hectic activity followed by long periods of waiting! Often work is long and tedious – checking through a list of 22,000 instances of profanities one by one, organizing 10,000 keywords taken from category names, or dealing with technical bugs when the assessment bot fails for no apparent reason. However, it is all worth it in the end.

    Our strategy has been intensely debated, but the group has reached a consensus. We elected not to follow the German model. Instead we chose to start with a core of quality articles on key subjects and expand from there. We have produced three test versions: Version 0.5, Version 0.7, and Version 0.8 with the goal of releasing better collections of articles in due course. The next general release is generically referred to as "Release Version" while our first "official" comprehensive release will be called Version 1.0. These collections are then made available for offline use using a reader such as Kiwix, which was chosen as Sourceforge project of the month. The project was on hiatus for several years because of the loss of our main developer. However, as of February 2016, a new group of developers has begun work on upgrading the code and the process, in order to start producing new collections again, especially collections for schools.

    Current needs

    Although we have much of the requisite system automated, there are still some outstanding tasks:

    • Preparation of a reliable index. If you can write code and you're interested in how to map category trees into a useful index (not as easy as it sounds!) please contact Walkerma.
    • Reviewing manual nominations. Whenever there is a new release being planned, we need volunteers to review a few articles and process them.
    • Propose useful "guide" pages to be added, such as lists and disambiguation pages.
    • Check for vandalism in the selected version-IDs of the articles.
    • Develop nice pages for navigation through the content, such as subject portals.
    • Test the reader software, and find and report bugs.
    • Help with distribution, especially in remote areas without Internet access.

    Please let us know on the Talk page if you can help with any of these.

    A page read offline in Kiwix

    Status

    At present, the main activities are:

    • The assessment scheme, which is used by WikiProjects for organizing their content, using talk page tags and the WP1.0 bot. The bot was updated with completely new Perl code in 2020–2021, and it is currently maintained by User:Audiodude. Technical problems with the bot should be reported here. Related to this work is the WP1.0 server (previously called "Release Version Tools) which provides ways for WikiProjects to analyze article lists and data relating to their work.
    • Collaborations to produce offline collections are done in collaboration with various people from Kiwix and Internet-in-a-Box. Please contact Walkerma if you wish to help.

    To select articles, we are mainly using a bot-assisted selection process based on assessment by individual WikiProjects, where articles are selected automatically based on quality and importance project rankings.

    RevID selection

    Based on discussions (at the 2017 Potsdam hackathon and since), we plan to reactivate RevID selection. Previously code based on WikiTrust was used in Version 0.8, and this appeared to produce a largely vandalism-free collection of articles. This worked by scoring each RevID based on the edits remaining in it, and choosing the most "trustworthy" recent RevID based on the WikiTrust algorithm.

    Misplaced Pages 1.0 projects

    Active projects

    If you would like to start a new project, please discuss it on the talk page first before adding it here.

    Misplaced Pages 1.0 Projects
    Name Summary of overall strategy Coordinator Description of activities
    School selection Put together selections of 1–10 GB sizes for use in high schools and elementary schools User:Walkerma and others Uses new code that starts with a seed and works out, guided by the WP 1 selection ranking to guide it
    Work via WikiProjects (WVWP) Use "networking" to mobilise our existing subject specialists User:Walkerma Organise and facilitate compilation of article lists from the WikiProjects and seek to identify important topics within each WikiProject's area of expertise. Locate important topics that are currently not being managed by projects. In conjunction with WP:COUNCIL, the project serves as a link with the editing community, and may later help locate expert reviewers.

    Past releases

    Past Misplaced Pages 1.0 Projects
    Name Summary of overall strategy Month of release Description of activities Website Next release
    Version 0.5 A test release prior to release of Version 1.0 above. April 2007 A test release designed to pave the way for Version 1.0. Used manual nominations and approval based on importance and quality. Approval was by only one person, from the review team. Okawix Version 0.7
    Version 0.7 A test release of automated article selections, prior to release of Version 1.0 above. Early 2010 A test release designed to pave the way for Version 1.0. Used SelectionBot to make an article selection based on importance and quality. Vandalism prevention used a script, with manual checks, which delayed the release significantly. Kiwix reader, ZIM download Version 0.8
    Version 0.8 A test release of automated article selections, prior to release of Version 1.0 above. March 2011 A test release designed to pave the way for Version 1.0. Version 0.8 used bot-assisted article selection, with manual adjustments based on feedback from WikiProjects. Used as a test of the WikiTrust revisionID selection code - this worked well. Misplaced Pages:Version 0.8/downloads. Version 0.9
    2006 Misplaced Pages CD Selection (previously called "Test Version") Work with release version done off site that was coordinated by BozMo April 2006 2000 articles with content filtered/selected for use by children (see Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages CD Selection). No longer available - see 2008/9 release below 2007 Misplaced Pages CD Selection (below)
    2007 Misplaced Pages CD Selection Work with release version done off site that was coordinated by BozMo May 2007 4655 articles with content filtered/selected for use by children (see Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages CD Selection). No longer available - see 2008/9 release below 2008/9 Misplaced Pages CD Selection (below)
    2008/9 Misplaced Pages CD Selection Work with release version done off site that was coordinated by BozMo October 2008 5502 articles with content filtered/selected for use by children (see Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages CD Selection). http://schools-wikipedia.org Not yet known

    Inactive projects

    Inactive Misplaced Pages 1.0 Projects
    Name Summary of overall strategy Coordinator Description of activities
    Authoritative Editions Gives experts in each field the tools to review suitable articles in their area of expertise and give their okay to particular revisions. Sj, Jeff Keller, Gnp
    1. Allow editors to propose new groups; for example: "Featured Article review" or "American Physical Society peer review".
    2. Each blessing group would have a set of review guidelines.
    3. Each blessing group would consist of this set of guidelines, and a set of users who could bless a revision of an article as satisfying them.
    4. Articles with blessed revisions would display icons or links to last-blessed revisions.
    Featured Articles First reviewing older or problem FAs to ensure that quality is maintained, ready for inclusion of these articles in Misplaced Pages 1.0. (Now a standard part of the FA system)
    Geography project to produce a descriptive gazetteer of the world for publication. This could include an atlas, continents, countries and major cities. This would serve as a test bed for publishing Misplaced Pages 1.0, but could also be a valuable stand-alone product.
    Three Level Editing Users participate in a three part editing process to assure that pages are up to quality standards. The first level is just a general check, the second level is a factual check, and the third level is a last "just in case" check. This process would assure that articles would be up to standards without putting too much responsibility on one user.
    Biographies Improve and assess biographical articles Focus especially on the 200 Core Biographies, in conjunction with Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Biography.

    .

    Dynamic Pocket Cyclopedia Lists most important FAs, FLs, and GAs. An evolving list of no more than half of Misplaced Pages's most important featured articles, featured lists, and designated good articles.
    WikiSort Integrate the sifting process into the Wiki. Aims to use data from the planned user rating scheme to provide rankings of articles, such that important quality articles can be automatically identified for inclusion in Misplaced Pages 1.0. This project has been rendered obsolete by WikiProject-based assessments (see above).
    Article assessment To assess articles This project has been rendered obsolete by WikiProject-based assessments (see above).

    Publishing steps

    The process of generating an offline version of a sub-selection of Misplaced Pages article is multistage. It needs many dedicated and singled-purposed operations. The following chart show how the WP1 project envisioned things in 2010.

    The general process for producing an offline release

    Even if this chart is still, to a large extend, valid; we practice and envision things slightly differently nowadays. One of the most important paradigm change we had to make is to remove as much as possible human based manual activity because the amount of work is simply too high to be achieved in a reasonable amount of time. We tend now to automate as much as possible the whole process. As a consequence the project is now predominantly focused on technology.

    Technical approach

    Support Wikiproject assessment effort

    The first software created to support the WP1 project has been the User:WP_1.0_bot. First written in Perl by User:CBM and then slighly modified and maintained by a few other volunteers. In 2020 the bot has been totally rewritten in Python following modern development standards (API, automated tests, etc.) by User:Audiodude. The code base is available en developed on Github.

    The WP1bot had and still have three traditional purposes:

    • gather assessments (via categories introduced on main namespace articles talk pages),
    • upload on Misplaced Pages logs & stats
    • provide key information & tools to Wikiproject on a dedicated Web service. The data can also be accessed through an API at api.wp1.openzim.org

    Select article titles

    ...

    Select article revision

    ...

    Scrape selected articles for offline usage

    ...

    Orchestrate periodic and multiple scraping

    ...

    Publish and distribute offline snapshots

    ...

    Statistics

    The WP 1.0 bot tracks assessment data (article quality and importance data for individual WikiProjects) assigned via Talk page banners. If you would like to add a new WikiProject to the bot's list, please read the instructions at Misplaced Pages:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Using the bot.

    The global summary table below is computed by taking the highest quality and importance rating for each assessed article in the main namespace.

    All rated articles by quality and importance
    Quality Importance
    Top High Mid Low ??? Total
    FA 1,581 2,512 2,422 1,971 182 8,668
    FL 180 702 772 695 100 2,449
    A 372 684 787 582 92 2,517
    GA 3,262 7,420 14,876 19,850 1,767 47,175
    B 17,153 33,231 55,018 70,937 23,750 200,089
    C 17,159 54,822 137,182 317,293 93,082 619,538
    Start 18,552 93,049 419,011 1,647,097 415,486 2,593,195
    Stub 4,257 31,309 277,319 2,810,905 760,132 3,883,922
    List 4,941 17,459 54,771 203,083 81,641 361,895
    Assessed 67,457 241,188 962,158 5,072,413 1,376,232 7,719,448
    Unassessed 112 400 942 16,312 392,887 410,653
    Total 67,569 241,588 963,100 5,088,725 1,769,119 8,130,101
    About this table

    Related pages

    General

    Assessment and validation

    Misplaced Pages books

    • Misplaced Pages:Books & meta:WikiReader - Misplaced Pages books are collections of articles from Misplaced Pages on a certain topic, in the form of PDFs published for download and intended to be printed, and also to be sold in printed form.
    • The Book Tool, and Wiki to print, a collaboration between the Foundation and OSI/PediaPress.

    Article selections

    See also

    Misplaced Pages community
    For a listing of current collaborations, tasks, and news, see the Community portal.
    For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the Dashboard.
    General community
    topics
    Contents and grading
    WikiProjects
    and collaborations
    Awards and feedback
    Maintenance tasks
    Administrators
    and noticeboards
    Content dispute
    resolution
    Other noticeboards
    and assistance
    Deletion
    discussions
    Elections and voting
    Directories, indexes,
    and summaries

    Flag

    In the info box, should the South African flag be the current flag or the flag at the time of the conflict? --Danny Reese 14:52, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

    It should be the one that was flown at the time of the conflict-- 12oct06 Sponge1354

    Problems with the picture

    Wow, that is a horrible photo to use. First off, most of the writing is in Chinese. Secondly, Cabinda, which is formally part of Angola, is not included as such in the picture. Ouch. I say delete it.-Thomas.macmillan 02:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

    Fair use rationale for Image:Fnlaflag.gif

    Image:Fnlaflag.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

    Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

    If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 09:33, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

    Disputed

    The article has many problems. For one thing it is incoherent by refering to persons without explaining who they are or their role. The timeline is jumps back and forth. Som attempts to begin to correct this was reverted: Please explain, there are many other things unsourced and these statemetns are not controversial and a necessary introduction.Ultramarine 14:40, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

    Deletion of sourced material

    Please explain this deletion of sourced material: Ultramarine 15:23, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

    1. You are not adding sourced material. 2. You are moving events that took place in the 1970s out of the 1970s section. 3. Your previous statement on this talkpage indicated that you were only interested in causing disruption. Perspicacite 15:37, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
    1. I were extensively adding sourced material, like "On January 15, 1975, the independence treaty was signed. Elections were to to be held within nine months and full independence were to be proclaimed on Novemver 11, 1975. 400,000 Portuguese departed during February-June 1975. Tensions quickly emerged and the coalition government collapsed on August 14." 2. Give example please. 3. What statement? Ultramarine 15:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
    The example you just provided demonstrates why this content should not be added: it's vague, misspelled, and does not follow the reference style currently used. The international agreement is the Alvor Agreement. You misspelled "November." You did not mention either the author or the publication date of the book you are citing. Your grammar is also incorrect: "independence was to be proclaimed" not "were to be proclaimed." The statement I was referring to is immediately preceding this section. Perspicacite 15:52, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
    Spelling or reference style can be corrected. The exact details of the source could be easily found by clicking on the link. I can cite it in full details in this article if you prefer. If your only objections are spelling and reference style, I will correct these before adding back the material. Considering this, any objections to adding back the sourced material? Ultramarine 15:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

    Post what you wish to add here with spelling and grammatical corrections and the same reference style. Provided it meets that burden I have no problem having it added to the article. Perspicacite 16:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

    See here: User:Ultramarine/Sandbox3. Any objections to changing to this? Ultramarine 16:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
    Yes... you have the same content in the introduction as in the separate section "The Civil War." I also do not understand why there is a separate section with that title, as the article deals solely with the civil war. Perspicacite 17:05, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
    The introduction is a summary. It is supposed to repeat some of the material in the body. I changed the title to "The factions in the civil war"Ultramarine 17:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
    I'm sorry, but I feel like I'm beating a dead horse. You still have basic grammatical errors in the text. "were" instead of "was," missing periods, etc. Perspicacite 17:32, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
    If you point them out, I will correct them. That is not a reason for excluding material.Ultramarine 17:33, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

    At this point I'm going to have to suggest getting a third opinion because I truly do not see the point of adding the proposed content. Perspicacite 17:44, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

    Another point, you said the Caetano government was quickly replaced by a Democratic government, but the National Salvation Junta ruled Portugal for two years. Perspicacite 17:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
    The Junta quickly declared the intention to restore democracy and held elections in 1975. But we can certainly clarify this. Any other concrete objection? Ultramarine 17:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
    Made some corrections to clarify as per above. Anything else? Ultramarine 18:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

    GAC Review

    1. Broad: Pass
    2. Factually accurate: Pass
    3. Neutral POV: Pass
    4. Images: Pass
    5. Stable: Pass
    6. Well-written: Pass

    Well written article all in all. Pass.Mitch 22:07, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

    GA Review

    I don't believe this article received an adequate review. It doesn't appear to meet the GA criteria. For that reason, I am nominating it for review at WP:GA/R. Please feel free to participate in the discussion there.

    Some of the issues I noticed in scanning the article:

    • Years in dates need to be wikified for user date preferences.
    • Copyrighted image needs a fair use rationale.
    • References need to be formatted according to WP:CITE with all available information included. LARA♥LOVE 19:16, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

    Regards, LARA♥LOVE 19:20, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

    • I, Perspicacite, am reposting the following note originally posted on WP:GAR:
    Angolan Civil War:
    Angolan Civil War (Edit · Talk · History · Watch)
    (De)listing: Archive at GA/R, WP:GA, T:GA#, Article talk.

    I don't believe this article received an adequate review. There is a copyright image which lacks a fair use rationale and a movie poster that is inappropriately being used in this article (the copyright on the image clearly states it is only appropriate for fail use when it is used to provide critical commentary on the film in question or the poster it self; additionally, the fair use rationale for this image should be specific to each article in which it is used, not a blanket FUR for all uses), the years are not wikified in full dates and some dates are not wikified at all, it's very stubby in places with many one-sentence paragraphs, there is a main article link to a redlink article, there are inconsistencies in formatting voting results (ie. 54-22 vs. 12/91), I believe the use of dashes needs to be corrected, it is in need of a good copy-edit, and the references are not consistently formatted correctly. LARA♥LOVE 19:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

    Delist per nomination. The footnotes/citations in particular are a mess. Drewcifer 04:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

    If there is a problem with the movie image then it should just be removed - it's not important. Are the other images acceptable? The years I disagree with you on. There seems to be a drive to link to every year every time it appears an article. I linked to years the first time they appear in the article. If there's a specific requirement in the GA standards for linking to years please point it out. I'll remove the main article dead link. There is no inconsistency in the voting results. The second example you provided, 12/91, is not a vote. It's the name of a law: "Law 12/91." What's wrong with the dashes? Which sections need copy-editing? Up until I began converting the refs to Cite book a minute ago, all refs had the same formatting. Perspicacite 06:19, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

    I removed the movie image and replaced the main article link. Perspicacite 06:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
    First, in response to your comment on my talk page, it's not delisted; that's the nomination at GA/R and the first !vote (not actually a vote, more of a recommendation).
    Okay, on to the article:
    • There is a copyrighted image (not the poster, which needs to be removed) that needs a fair use rationale.
    • The years need to be wikified for user date preferences. Some users choose to have their dates displayed as 2007-09-04, but the code is broken if the year is not wikified or if it is a piped link.
    • I corrected the dashes. Dashes between years and such should be N dashes.
    • The lead needs to be expanded to summarize the article. Currently, it's more of a definition.
    • As for the votes, I understand now. I thought it was saying the law was passed by a vote of 12/91, so disregard that.
    • A good copy-edit would condense the stubby paragraphs throughout the article. A sequence of one-sentence paragraphs doesn't look good.
    • As far as USD $ vs. US$, please see WP:$.
    Good luck with the article and best regards, LaraLove 16:12, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

    Issues have been addressed. Article will remain listed. Thank you and best regards. LaraLove 06:17, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

    "ANC" involvement in Shaba I

    I intend to remove the reference to "African National Congress" because I've seen no evidence for the involvement of the South African anti-apartheid movement which is now the ruling political party in South Africa in the conflict. There is no evidence that the African National Congress ever conducted any military operations in, or from, Angola. I admit that there may be a reference in sources to "ANC" but, in this case, it refers to the Armée Nationale Congolaise, the Congolese armed forces from 1960-71, some of whose elements (especially the former Katangese gendarmerie) opposed to Mobutu moved across the border into Angola after he became President of Congo-Kinshasa. Kahuzi 17:32, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

    I'm pretty sure I mentioned it on your talkpage at the time, but in case I never did... yeah, that was a really stupid mistake on my part. Perspicacite 12:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

    Infobox image

    May I just ask, what is an image of a Croatian T-55 doing in the lead of the Angolan Civil War article? Bogdan 00:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

    The Spaniards assure me it's a Cuban-owned tank fighting in Angola. Perspicacite 01:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
    Thanks for the reply. I guess it is possible that the originally Croatian tank (see here) was sold from the Croatian defense council to Cuba. Bogdan 01:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

    Actually Bogdan, you were right, and I was wrong Spanish Misplaced Pages was wrong. Moved from User talk:Dynaflow and User talk:Perspicacite:

    Hi, I saw you removed the infobox image on Angolan Civil War. While you are correct in that the tank is Croatian, the picture is of combat in the Angolan Civil War. Cuba bought many tanks from Eastern Europe which it used in the 70s and 80s when it invaded Angola. Would you mind restoring it? If there is any question as to the accuracy of its placement, see the Spanish Misplaced Pages article - they also use it in the infobox there. Jose João 06:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

    I removed it because it is of a Croatian T-55 at Barbara Range, an SFOR drive-around-and-blow-stuff-up area near Glamoč, in Bosnia. There is no apparent connection between that picture and the Angolan Civil War. --Dynaflow babble 06:20, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
    Really? How do you know the tank was in Glamoc? I added it based on what I found at the Spanish Misplaced Pages. Jose João 06:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
    The winter-weight, rather un-Cuban-looking uniforms and the residual snow at higher elevations on the hillsides tipped me off, and the summary on the image page (Image:HVO Army T-55 Glamoc firing MG.jpg) confirmed it. I've also gone and removed the images from es.wikipedia. --Dynaflow babble 06:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

    Inexplicable reverts by User:Perspicacite

    Is there a justifiable reason for removing the conversion template (that converts metric measurements to US measure amongst other conversions) from our article?

    These are the two (unexplained) reversions: and

    Normally, I would ask the reverter, but he consistently removes my questions without appropriate response (eg: ) and I really don't wish to engage in an edit war. Equally I can not imagine what is controversial and unacceptable about providing alternative measurements. Alice.S 16:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

    The edits by Alice.S seem bonafide to me. --Ezeu (talk) 17:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

    Questions for User:Perspicacite

    Your very first edit upon returning from a 48 hour block for edit warring was to revert your fellow editors again with an edit summary of: "rv, mix of vandalism and unexplained removal of references (also vandalism?)".

    Please would you now quickly tell us exactly

    1. which references were removed (use the <nowiki></nowiki> mark-up to precisely specify here)
    2. what the "vandalism" was
    3. why you have removed the conversion template (that converts metric measurements to US measure amongst other conversions) from our article again? Alice.S 22:30, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
    Let's see...
    • Number one, you are one person so you should not be referring to yourself in the plural.
    • Number two, you shouldnt be editing this article because..
    • This was vandalism. Do you really want to dispute that that's vandalism? Really? Jose João 22:41, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
    Please would you answer the questions so that we can progress. Either references were removed or they were not. If you do not address yourself to the 3 questions I posed, it must be assumed that your edit summary was false and you will then require alternative justifications for your revert(s). Alice.S 22:52, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
    Please refrain from restoring vandalism to Rhodesia and using a sockpuppet to vandalize Angolan Civil War. If you continue, you will be blocked. Jose João 22:57, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
    Please answer the questions so that we can progress. Either references were removed or they were not. If you do not address yourself to the 3 questions I posed, it will be assumed that your edit summary was false and you are just attempting diversionary tactics. You have made a request for the Arbitration Committee to examine my behaviour and if I have indeed been engaging in the sins you describe, they will deal with it. Until then, if you can not answer any of the three questions I posed above you will require alternative justifications for your revert(s). Alice.S 23:14, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
    You really should have been banned when you knowingly restored vandalism to Rhodesia. If you get away with it here, I will eat my hat. Jose João 23:31, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
    I am not aware of knowingly restoring vandalism on our Rhodesia article. Now would you please stick to this article and your reversions and please answer the questions so that we can progress. Either references were removed or they were not. If you do not now address yourself to the 3 questions I posed, your edit summary was false and you are just attempting diversionary tactics. You have made a request for the Arbitration Committee to examine my behaviour and if I have indeed been restoring vandalism , they will deal with it. Until then, if you can not answer any of the three questions I posed above you will require alternative justifications for your revert(s). Alice.S 23:45, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

    Despite not being able to provide any justification for damaging and inexplicable reverts, edit warring has continued today: Alice.S 18:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

    Please stop making test edits to Misplaced Pages. It is considered vandalism, which, under Misplaced Pages policy, can lead to being blocked from editing. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Jose João 18:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
    Perspicacite alias Jose João: That template is not intended to be used on article discussion pages (or for regular users either). Please specify exactly what the vandalism was that you believe you were countering when you reverted here again and why you keep removing relevant cited information and useful conversion templates. Alice.S 18:24, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
    1. Black Book of Communism p. 696
    Categories: