Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Uganda–Tanzania War

No consensus to promote at this time - Hawkeye7 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 11:20, 19 June 2021 (UTC) &laquo; Return to A-Class review list

Uganda–Tanzania War
Instructions for nominators and reviewers
 * Nominator(s): 

The Uganda–Tanzania War of 1978/1979 fits into a sparsely populated category of full-blown conflicts between independent African states in the post-colonial era. Although its origins remain obscure, notorious Ugandan dictator Idi Amin used hostilities as a pretext for annexing Tanzanian territory, triggering a counteroffensive that resulted in his overthrow. The war is historically significant for this, as well as for exposing the weakness of the Organisation of African Unity, draining Tanzania's economic resources, snubbing Muammar Gaddafi's foreign policy, setting the stage for the Ugandan Bush War, and bringing the incumbent Uganda President, Yoweri Museveni, to prominence. I hope to move this through A-class with an eye on perhaps one day making it FA. This article has successfully passed GAn. -Indy beetle (talk) 02:43, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Image review—pass
 * File:Gaddafi with Yasser arafat 1977.jpg copyright issue as this is probably a UK rather than Libyan photograph. Nominated for deletion at Commons.
 * Replaced. -Indy beetle (talk) 04:21, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Other images are fine for copyright and other issues. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  03:05, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Source review—pass
 * In "Works cited", there is a lack of consistency whether publishing location is included for books.
 * All locations added. -Indy beetle
 * "Regardless, most sources concur that the Tanzanians behaved relatively well, especially in comparison to Ugandan rebels and tribal militants" ideally there would be another source to back this up
 * I have added an additional source to back up this claim (namely Thornton, Robert (2008). Unimagined Community: Sex, Networks, and AIDS in Uganda and South Africa), and added quotes to the references for extra verification. Applodion (talk) 12:17, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
 * "Army Quarterly and Defence Journal" this journal appears to have named authors. Can you figure out who the author is and move to "works cited"?
 * I already tried finding the article title/author names etc., but was unable to determine them, thus I rendered the citation in its current form as that was the best I could do. -Indy beetle
 * Fleisher, Michael L. journal article; why isn't this listed in works cited with other journal articles?
 * Fixed. -Indy beetle
 * Africa Research Bulletin is a peer reviewed journal published by Blackwell. Should state the author + volume of the article and be listed in works cited.
 * I've hardly ever seen an Africa Research Bulletin article from this time period with a byline. Likewise, if I was able to determine the volumes these belonged too I would've added them. It may very well be a peer reviewed academic journal, but from this time period it serves much more like a magazine, and thus I'm using cite news to reference it and am treating its articles like newspaper pieces. -Indy beetle
 * Conflict And Cooperation In Southwestern Kenya: A Case Of Kuria-Maasai Relations, 1979-2010 : MA theses are not usually RS per WP:SCHOLARSHIP.
 * Removed. The user which added it had no other role in creating this article and used it to support one minor point, which I've also removed. They also tacked the citation onto other statements which were already supported, so I've removed those citations but left the text. -Indy beetle
 * "of which only a few thousand at most were deployed at the front lines at any given time." That's not quite what the source says, "Amin's fighting force could afford less than 3,000 troops at both war fronts". Also, I am not convinced that the newspaper is RS for this information since it does not state the source for it or name the author of the article.
 * Changed to "fewer than 3,000 were deployed at the front lines at any given time." This information is in keeping with the contemporaneous news reports that Amin could only rely on handfuls of soldiers, and looking at most of the battles as well as having read Avirgan's & Honey's work there were few instances in which the TPDF ever faced Ugandan opposition of obvious parity. New Vision is the state newspaper of Uganda, and staff writer pieces often don't have bylines. Special submissions are, far as I've seen, almost always attributed. The article makes references to consultations with historians and academics in other parts, so its apparent that the author did do some research. -Indy beetle
 * Is Al Akhbar (Lebanon) a reliable source? In 2010, New York Times stated that its "news pages that often show a loose mingling of fact, rumor and opinion" It is used as the only source for much of the information about PLO involvement.
 * I hope it would be okay if I answer this question, considering that I helped to write the article alongside Indy. In this case I think that we can consider the Al Akhbar trustworthy, as the author provides a list with references and sources at the bottom, including books and interviews with several PLO commanders who are known to have been part of the PLO's foreign operations. In addition, the Al Akhbar article was actually copied by numerous other Arabic-language newspapers which makes it likely that the information it provides is generally considered reliable. Finally, several claims from the newspaper can be verified or at least align with what is known from other sources. Where this information is disputed, such as in regard to the PLO's losses, the content is marked in the text as stemming from PLO sources. Applodion (talk) 10:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Source checks TBD (t &#183; c)  buidhe  04:26, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Source checks: TBD (t &#183; c)  buidhe  04:26, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Source checks
 * Fleisher 2003: mostly supports the previous statement
 * Lupogo 2001:
 * Mobilization: Supports the content. However, I notice that you cite a different source for "over 150,000" soldiers; Lupogo says "over 100,000" (which isn't mutually exclusive)
 * Demobilization: Supports the content
 * Nyeko 1997: "Smaller Ugandan opposition groups without armed branches, such as the Zambia-based Uganda Liberation Group (Z), encouraged their members to donate money to support the Tanzanian war effort" I have concerns because the source says that ULG(Z) encouraged members to donate, but the cited pages don't say that other groups did. I can't find where the source says that ULG(Z) lacked an armed branch or characterizes ULG(Z) or other groups(?) as "smaller".
 * Changed to be closer to source; The Zambia-based Uganda Liberation Group (Z) encouraged their members to donate money to support the Tanzanian war effort.
 * "SUM conducted bombings and raids to destabilise Amin's regime from within" The source says that SUM claimed responsibility for bombings, and I don't see where it supports "raids".
 * Avirgan & Honey (p. 74) do confirm that SUM was launching "commando raids" and as examples list an assassination of three government agents, blowing up a Kampala fuel depot, cutting electricity, and attacking outposts near Jinja, Entebbe, and Mpigi. Added for extra verification. -Indy beetle
 * Southall 1980:
 * Used to support "infighting", although Southall doesn't use this word. Oxford defines "infighting" as "hidden conflict or competitiveness within an organization." There's nothing hidden about what Southall describes so maybe a better word would be "disturbances"?
 * Added source which says "1978 saw further factional infighting between Amin’s ‘plateau’ of senior officers, and the continuing breakdown of the Uganda Army into competing components." I think that it is pretty clear. -Indy beetle
 * Crop disruption: supported
 * 100,000 homeless estimate: supported
 * Posnett 1980: "It was greatly hampered in establishing itself by the lack of an effective police force or civil service and the looting of equipment from offices." I can't find that on page 147
 * Oops, it was page 148. Fixed. -Indy beetle
 * "after Kampala's capture, little further damage was caused by the fighting" supported
 * "rural areas were mostly physically undisturbed by the fighting" supported
 * Kasozi
 * "A.B.K. Kasozi stated that thousands were murdered by retreating Amin loyalists in March and April 1979" supported
 * "Tanzanian military advisers remained in the country as late as 1984" supported
 * "In February 1981 Museveni..." supported
 * Overall the verifiability is satisfactorary although there are a few things that could be tweaked. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  11:21, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey and, what's the status of the source review here? Does it pass or are there some queries to look into since this is dead for over two months? Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 16:56, 13 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Comments by Buidhe
 * Would it be possible to provide the original language and English translations for titles mentioned in "Historiography and documentation" section? (t &#183; c)  buidhe  04:26, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * All those sources mentioned by name are done so in whatever language they were originally published. Online Swahili translators are also pretty bad for precision; I've tried translating Kuzama kwa Idi Amin but ended up with a rather vague and confusing answer. I'd prefer to leave them as is, since at least we know the original titles are correct. -Indy beetle
 * Much of the content linked in notes from the infobox is later duplicated in text in the article. I would try to reduce duplication by removing/reducing notes, leaving elaboration of the details to the text.
 * I’ve trimmed down some of the notes. -Indy beetle (talk)

Eddie891
Hi, Indy, looks like a nice long article, I've added to my weekend reading list. I will try to comment soon. Eddie891 Talk Work 18:34, 4 December 2020 (UTC) That's just about anything from me, the vast majority of comments. Really, very good work-- long, but readable. Eddie891 Talk Work 01:10, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Though his commanders urged him to respond in kind, Nyerere agreed to mediation overseen by the President of Somalia, Siad Barre, which resulted in the signing of the Mogadishu Agreement, which stipulated that Ugandan and Tanzanian forces had to withdraw to positions at least 10 kilometres away from the border and refrain from supporting opposition forces that targeted each other's governments. Kinda a long sentence, do you think it could be split up, particularly to remove the "which resulted [. . .] which stipulated"? No big deal if not
 * Split.
 * "subsequently collapsed" I think a year (i.e. "collapsed in [YEAR]") would be more helpful than 'subsequently'
 * Collapsed in 1977, added.
 * I added some convert templates, but you should standardize which units come first (miles or km, mostly)
 * add the date of the expulsion, maybe?
 * Added.
 * " resulting in him becoming "
 * Changed to "thus".
 * through background, more to come. I'll plan to lightly ce, mostly formatting and links-- unless you'd rather I didn't. Eddie891 Talk Work 22:47, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
 * "Tanzanian leaders felt that Amin was only making provocations." what does 'only' mean here?
 * They did not believe these were actions that would precipitate an invasion of their country, though, knowing so little about the origins of the war as we do, it's quite possible Amin didn't believe that either.
 * "Over 2,000 soldiers under the command " I think it would be helpful if you just explicitly stated their allegiance (i.e. "over 2,000 Ugandan"
 * Done.
 * "The Tanzanians began monitoring Ugandan radio frequencies, and was" I think "the Tanzanians [. . .] was able" clash, but may be wrong
 * Fixed.
 * Can you get a map of the area (the Kagera Salient)?
 * Added map showing the Missenyi District, which is congruent to salient.
 * "Ugandan commanders nevertheless feared "?
 * Done.
 * "Six African leaders condemned the Kagera invasion" I think "invasion of Kagara would flow better, but it's not a big deal eitherway
 * Done.
 * " thus making it farther from Kagera "?
 * Done.
 * "After a long trek via rail and road," can you quantify how far it was or how long it took?
 * Avirgan and Honey do not specify.
 * " However, by the second week of November,"?
 * Done.
 * " as possible threat to their own" -> "a possible threat"?
 * Fixed.
 * "About 200–350 Pakistani experts were stationed in Uganda since early 1978" -> "About 200–350 Pakistani experts had been stationed in Uganda since early 1978"?
 * Done.
 * "all of its military advisers." what advisers? They haven't been mentioned yet
 * The Soviets had loaned the Ugandans some air force technicians. They weren't of great number or importance far as I can tell, which is why they weren't previously mentioned, and were withdrawn as the USSR wanted nothing to do with the war. Stereotypical Cold War dynamics were not really at play in the Uganda-Tanzania War.
 * "the Libyan government officially repudiated an accusation " Suggest simply "denied"
 * Done.
 * "On 9 March over a thousand Libyan troops and about 40 PLO guerrillas" per MOS:NUMNOTES, "Comparable values should be all spelled out or all in figures", suggest "a thousand [. . .] forty"
 * Numerised.
 * " such as 122 mm mortars" needs to be converted, I'd reckon?
 * Done.
 * "which threatened Libyan military involvement on Amin's behalf if Tanzania did not withdraw its troops from Ugandan in 24 hours." Hadn't that already happened?
 * Yes, hence the following Nyerere was surprised by the ultimatum, since he knew that Libyan soldiers had fought with the Ugandans at Lukaya. God knows why Gaddafi thought he could pretend his troops hadn't just participated in the largest battle of the war.
 * "The battle marked the de facto end of the" doesn't need itals
 * Removed.
 * I thought the Uganda Air Force had been " effectively eliminated as a fighting force" much earlier?
 * If I may answer this question: The Uganda Army Air Force lost most of its aircraft and pilots during the war's early stages; it no longer had a tangible impact on the conflict from February 1979. However, it still existed, and flew a few missions. After the Battle of Entebbe, however, it quickly fell apart and was factually destroyed. Thus, the UAAF effectively ended twice: The first time only as "fighting force", the second time completely. Applodion (talk) 18:20, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * " Mass desertions and defections were the consequence" perhaps "resulted"?
 * Done.
 * "In Mbale, the a group of 250 Ugandan troops" "the a"
 * Fixed.
 * " Once the invasion of Kagera was made public, " suggest "made public IN DATE"
 * Moshiro doesn't point to an exact date, though Avirgan & Honey say that Radio Tanzania first spoke about the affair on 31 October. This is already mentioned in the article in the invasion of Kagera section, I don't see the need to be redundant and to restate this I think does little to bolster the reader's understanding.
 * "retelling stories of the atrocities committed in Tanzanian territory" so were there atrocities, or did Radio Tanzania allege them?
 * I imagine there were some exaggerations, but there were indeed atrocities. As stated earlier in the article, Uganda troops looted Kagera and murdered civilians.
 * "Christianity specialist Emmanuel K. Twesigye" what does that mean? He was an academic specializing in christianity?
 * Yes; this is relevant because the most popular Just War theory foundations have a strong historical connection to Christian thinking.
 * "Belgium later cited the Uganda–Tanzania War as an example of justified intervention" this sentence would benefit from a date
 * I don't think the source was explicit about this, at any rate the Kosovo War is linked and very clearly rested in the late 1990s, so I don't think a date is necessary.
 * "remained largely plagued by violence " what does 'largely plagued' mean?
 * Excised "largely".
 * "Over time many Ugandans grew tired " any reason why?
 * Probably a very natural response to seeing foreign men with rifles constantly patrolling one's own country. There were also some incidents of violence and confrontations between TPDF soldiers and Ugandan civilians, which were not pleasantly received by the public.
 * I think explicitly stating the outcome of the Ugandan Bush war would be helpful
 * The result is stated later in the article: In February 1981 Museveni, denouncing the elections, organised a small band of rebels and began attacking UNLA forces, thus entering the civil war. Shortly thereafter they co-founded a new rebel coalition, the National Resistance Movement. Museveni overthrew the Ugandan government in 1986 and became president.
 * "Uganda was embroiled in a political crisis almost immediately after the UNLF took power." suggest "took power IN DATE"
 * I think that's fairly obvious, the article mentions that the UNLF was installed in April 1979 after Amin was chased from Kampala.
 * "In November Binaisa began fearing" perhaps "began to fear"?
 * Done.
 * "the ex-soldiers consequently used their guns" suggest "many ex-soldiers..." because it presumably wasn't all of them
 * Revised.
 * "most notably, by 1978, over 50% of all Tanzanian soldiers belonged to the Kuria people by 1978," duplicated "by 1978"
 * Fixed.
 * "On 1 September a series of national ceremonies " year?
 * Added 1979.
 * If neither "J. Sichangi Mambilianga" or the song have articles, why does it merit a mention, given that it probably isn't the only part of the war that has affected popular culture.
 * It probably is not, but it's the only example I could find. I could go either way on keeping it.


 * Sorry for the long wait, I've responded to all your comments now. -Indy beetle (talk) 02:35, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the missed ping. The article looks to be of very high quality now. Happy to support (mostly on prose). I'd cut the pop culture section if there's only a non-notable thing to list, but don't feel that strongly. Nice work! Eddie891 Talk Work 03:19, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Harry
Just a placeholder for now. I'm slowly reading through. It'll probably be a few days before I can get to it properly but I can see this has been open a long time and wanted to let you know it's on my radar! HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts? 23:06, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Marajani,[57] Lieutenant Colonel Juma Butabika, and Colonel Abdu Kisuule is there any particular reason to name check middle-ranking commanders who don't have articles?
 * The invasion was one of the largest events of the war (not to mention it started the conflict), thus I thought it useful to mention them. As stated previously in the article, Butabika is widely held in at least one theory too have engineered the situation that led to hostilities, and one of the people who accuses him of such is Kisuule. Juma Butabika also has an article (previously linked in the body text). Also, as far as "middle-ranking commanders", Lieutenant Colonels/Colonels in Amin's army were generally put in charge of regiments, and played key roles in the war as these were the most commonly wielded operational units.
 * However, it was headquartered in Songea "however" gets heavy scrutiny at FAC, partly because it's massively over-used. In this instance, something like "though" or "although" would work better, or failing that, "nonetheless", because you're not contradicting anything.
 * Deleted word.
 * Kiwelu took command of the troops, which initiated a heavy artillery bombardment of the northern bank the troops initiated the bimbardment? Kiwelu initiated it? It was initiated by his arrival? It's not clear from "which".
 * Revised.
 * Nyerere, to the chagrin of his officers, toured Kagera What about it did the officers take exception to?
 * They feared for his safety since there were still some Ugandan soldiers active in the area.
 * The TPDF'S Southern Brigade — renamed the 208th Brigade — finally crossed the border emdashes shouldn't be spaced (MOS:DASH)
 * Fixed.
 * ordered the TPDF to refrain from harming civilians and property from then on To what extent was this obeyed?
 * It seems this was obeyed for the most part; most reputable sources have little complaint about the Tanzanians behavior in Uganda during the war. The notable exception to this is in the aftermath of the Battle of Masaka (read more here), when the TPDF destroyed most of the town as revenge. Political scientist Daniel Acheson-Brown wrote that that affair "seems to be a contradiction of Nyerere's earlier order not to destroy civilian areas" but the point is not really given much exploration.
 * As a gesture of support to Tanzania, Mozambique, Zambia, Angola, Ethiopia, and Algeria sent it small quantities of arms Suggest reordering to avoid potential confusion → As a gesture of support, Mozambique, Zambia, Angola, Ethiopia, and Algeria sent Tanzania small quantities of arms.
 * Done.
 * Despite the flight of Amin and the fall of the capital, however, scattered and disjointed remnants "however" again; this one adds absolutely nothing because the sentence starts with "despite"
 * Agreed, removed.
 * In the "media and propaganda" section, I assume that the radio stations were state-owned/operated but it's not made explicit?
 * They were indeed state radio stations; almost every African government maintained its own radio station at the time. Radio Uganda and Radio Tanzania are linked further up in the article and their respective articles indicate this, though if you want I could make this explicit.
 * 19 explanatory footnotes seems like a lot and several are quite lengthy. Some appear to be redundant to the text, and some are of questionable relevance, while others look like they should be included in the prose.
 * I've trimmed down on these; there are now only 11 footnotes, and only one is particularly lengthy.
 * Haven't done a full source review, but I notice you have a few ISBN-10s mixed in with ISBN-13s.
 * Fixed.

A lengthy article, but I think necessarily so for the subject. I wouldn't recommend making it significantly longer, but 10,000 words is perhaps not very generous to provide a proper overview of a complex subject like an entire war. All in all, excellent work. HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts? 01:04, 19 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi Harry, has Indy beetle given you enough information to reach a decision on? Cheers. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:54, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I've responded to your comments. -Indy beetle (talk) 16:17, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Noting that the point about Nyerere's safety doesn't appear to be in the article, but not a big enough deal to withhold support. HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts? 22:49, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Johannes Schade
Dear Indy beetle. This is my 1st MH A-Class review. Please, anyone, correct me if I do not as expected. The following are just opinions and suggestions of a novice. Dear Indy beetle. Thanks for taking my criticism so graciously. Please take into account that my English is 2nd language. :-) Johannes Schade (talk) 20:53, 19 February 2021 (UTC) Best regards, Johannes Schade (talk) 20:53, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The prose size is 12180 words (76kB). The "Article size" guideline (WP:LENGTH) says this is too long. I feel it could be shortened to less than 10000 words. This might be achieved by reducing the subsections for which articles already exist.
 * Per that guideline, articles over 60kB should "Probably should be divided (although the scope of a topic can sometimes justify the added reading material)". Other users have mentioned this article's length but, like me, seem to find it acceptable considering the scope of the topic. This war was unprecedented on the African continent and had major implications for Uganda, so I think it's necessary that it's going to have to be long to be comprehensive. I'll work on trimming the lede, but if you think there needs to be more trimming and summarizing in the body you'll have to point me to specifics. -Indy beetle (talk)
 * Dear Indy beetle. You are of course right. Johannes Schade (talk) 20:53, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I also believe that the lead is too long. The 3rd paragraph of the lead is very long and should normally have been split, were it not for the requirement that leads should not have more than 4 paragraphs (MOS:LEADLENGTH). A lead should normally not repeat sentences from the main text. This information should be summarised in the lead, which would lead to formulations that differ from those used in the main text.
 * I believe this has been sufficiently slimmed now.
 * The captions of the multiple image of the two presidents are both MOS:SEAOFBLUE: two juxtaposed wikilinks each. I would propose to remove the "president" links as being less likely to be intended by the reader.
 * Removed.
 * Lead, 3rd paragraph, 1st sentence. I would omit "numerous".
 * 2nd paragraph? Removed.
 * Lead, 3rd paragraph, 3rd sentence. Wlinking "defeated" to Battle of Lukaya is unexpected (MOS:EGG).
 * Changed.
 * Lead, 3rd paragraph, 4th sentence "begin to completely collapse" -> "begin to collapse"
 * Done.
 * Lead, 3rd paragraph, "Though Nyerere believed ..." difficult to understand but perhaps not important. Could be reduced to -> "Nyerere believed the Ugandan rebels should be given time ..."
 * Shortened.
 * Lead, 3rd paragraph "which led to unifying ..." shorten -> "where the Uganda National Liberation Front (UNLF) was founded. (to be continued) Johannes Schade (talk) 15:20, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Done.
 * Instability in Uganda. Treatment of the expulsion of Asian could be shortened as there is an article on this and the expulsion is marginal to the topic.
 * Not sure what you mean, it's only given two sentences of discussion.
 * Border clashes and Battle of Mutukula, 1st paragraph comma needed (?) "high ground at Mutukula, Uganda along" -> "high ground at Mutukula, Uganda, along"
 * Done.
 * Tanzanian invasion of southern Uganda, 1st paragraph "Nyerere did not initially intend on expanding the war beyond defending " -> "At first Nyerere wanted only to defend "
 * Revised.
 * Tanzanian invasion of southern Uganda, 1st paragraph "Obote assured Nyerere that if the locales were taken" -> "Obote assured Nyerere that if the towns were taken"
 * Done.
 * Libyan intervention and Battle of Lukaya. 1st paragraph. In-mid February," -> "In mid-February,"
 * Fixed.
 * Moshi Conference. "rebels, led Obote and" -> "rebels, led by Obote and"
 * Fixed.
 * Fall of Kampala and end of the war. 3rd paragraph "With Libyan forces having suffered heavily during the battle, Nyerere decided to allow them to flee Kampala" -> "Nyerere decided to allow the Libyan forces, who had suffered heavily during the battle, to flee Kampala"; "Ethiopia, where they were repatriated" -> "Ethiopia, from where they were repatriated"; "posed a serious setback" -> "was a serious setback"
 * Done.
 * Fall of Kampala and end of the war. 4th paragraph "Few Ugandan or Libyan units gave much resistance" -> "Few Ugandan or Libyan units resisted"
 * Done.
 * Fall of Kampala and end of the war. 5th paragraph "Despite the flight of Amin and the fall of the capital, however, scattered and disjointed remnants of the Ugandan military continued to offer resistance." -> "Despite Amin's flight and the fall of the capital, scattered and disjointed remnants of the Ugandan military continued to resist."
 * Done.
 * Media and propaganda "laudatory praise" -> "praise" to be continued Johannes Schade (talk) 21:04, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Done.
 * Lead, 1st paragraph – "from the Uganda–Tanzania border." -> "from the border."
 * Done.
 * Lead, 2nd paragraph – "Nyerere did not initially intend on expanding the war beyond defending " -> "At first Nyerere wanted only to defend ". Is not "to intend" constructed with an infinitive and not with "on" followed by a gerund? However, "to be intent on" is English. That same sentence appears in Section "Tanzanian invasion of southern Uganda", 1st paragraph. Should not the lead be more summary?
 * Revised.
 * Lead, 2nd paragraph – "After Amin failed ... invasion, The TPDF's 20th Division occuppied the towns " -> "After Amin failed ... invasion, the TPDF occupied the towns " (lower-case "the", one p in "occupied"). Should particular units (20th Division) be named in the lead?
 * Fixed.
 * Hi Indy beetle - nudge . Gog the Mild (talk) 18:54, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I haven't completed my responses yet. Sorry for the slow pace, I was ill earlier this week. -Indy beetle (talk) 22:44, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I am sorry to hear that. No problem re the pace, I pinged just to make sure that you hadn't overlooked the additional comments. No rush. Gog the Mild (talk) 00:57, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I have responded to your comments. -Indy beetle (talk) 03:58, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Dear Indy beetle. Thank you very much. I still feel that the article and the lede are both too long and that there is room for shortening the article by using a plainer style of English without losing content. With regard to length, the article might create a dangerous precedence. You have the support of Buidhe, Eddie891, and HJ Mitchel and do not need mine. It is a nice and readable article. I will not vote as I lack competence as a novice and 2nd-language speaker. I bow out here. Thank you very much for your patience. Best regards, Johannes Schade (talk) 07:39, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Johannes Schade and thanks for the review. Is the length the sole reason for your lack of support? Or is it the main issue but there are others as well - if so, there is no necessary reason to specify them. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:18, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Dear all. It is the sole reason. Best regards, Johannes Schade (talk) 21:03, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Anything more to add? The article only needs one more support to pass. Hawkeye7  (discuss)  19:43, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with JS that the article is too long. There is no explicit length requirement in the A-class criteria (although I suppose it would fall under "unnecessary detail"), so I'm not going to formally oppose, but 12128 words will get you instant opposes (including mine) based on the length requirement at FAC, so I would look at trimming it by 1/4 to 1/3 through increased conciseness and summary style. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  19:32, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

InsaneHacker
Non-member lurker here. Just wanted to note that currently note 85 returns a CS1 missing title error. I can see above that some other journal pieces you cited were without titles, and perhaps the same is the case here, in which case none can be added, but I didn't want to do it myself in case there actually is a title and the omission is non-intentional. Sincerely, InsaneHacker (💬) 20:39, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Didn't know about that trick. Fixed. -Indy beetle (talk) 22:49, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Offer by PM
G'day, I agree that the article is probably 20-25% too long, and its prospects of success at FAC aren't good at this length. Rather than review myself, I would be happy to have a crack at trimming it down or identifying a suitable spinoff or two if you are interested? It can be very hard to do that if you are the primary editor. Let me know? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:24, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for you offer and I do of course accept. Please use the conflict navbox for articles related to this war to find places where you think content can be migrated. I've done my best for trim it down but another pair of eyes will be very helpful. To note, the article on the Invasion of Kagera includes a lot of the dispute about how the war actually started, so that may be an area ("Outbreak if war") that can be trimmed without loss of content. -Indy beetle (talk) 20:33, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * No worries, happy to help, . Because you have done the hard yards on the child articles, many or all of which are GA, you are at a distinct advantage here over many editors trying to write a summary article on a large subject. Can I start by suggesting that the current Invasion of Kagera section is ~1,300 words, and the lead for the Invasion of Kagera article is a tick over 500 words. Given we should be going for summary style, the Kagera section in this overview article should be similar in size to the lead in the Invasion of Kagera article, certainly no more than 600 words. This will save you 700 words, just with this section. An approach I have found useful is to start by putting the main article lead in my sandbox, citing it, and then working on it to improve the prose with the aim of keeping it to a similar size. I'd be happy to help with workshopping it in your sandbox. If this is successful, we could then have a crack at doing the same with the Battle of Lukaya section (where I see the scope to reduce size from 1,250 to about 450 words, saving about 800). Together, these two tasks will probably reduce the total word count by around 1,500. That would be a good start, and the Battle of Mutukula section is another obvious candidate for this approach, with a similar reduction getting the article as a whole below 10,000 words, which should be the ceiling for an article of this sort. There appears to be some scope to do this with a few others sections as well. Thoughts? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:47, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Very tired at the moment and soon to go to bed, but I like your suggestions and will work more on them in the near future. I've begun trimming the lede here of excess which should help. -Indy beetle (talk) 08:57, 13 June 2021 (UTC)