Talk:Congo Crisis/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Cliftonian (talk · contribs) 10:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

I'll review this. —Cliftonian (talk) 10:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much Cliftonian! Brigade Piron (talk) 15:12, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Infobox and lead

• I'm fairly sure "Katangese" was the term used at the time and not "Katangan". I would recommend reviewing this.
  • Either works, I believe. Google fight, not a scientific measure I admit, gives more for "Katangan"? Brigade Piron (talk) 15:12, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Indeed both seem to be used both in reports at the time and in academic literature. Regarding usage at the time, Google newspapers search for "Katangese" gives 1,270 while "Katangan" gets only 298. Google books gives roughly equal results that vary depending on the wording, but perhaps "Katangan" slightly more often. Anyway, whichever usage we end up using we should go through and make sure only that one is used consistently. (At present we have both "Katangese" and "Katangan" in the body of the article. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Y I have kept Katangan which I think fits better with English grammar. Katangese is basically a corruption of Katangais(e) and though you're certainly right that it had contemporary use, the more modern publications I've seen tend to use Katangan.
        • I have asked Dank (talk · contribs) on his talk page to help us out on this one. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:23, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
          • Dank recommends going with "Katangese" on the basis that that is the demonym given by Oxforddictionaries.com, m-w.com, and the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary. —Cliftonian (talk) 18:39, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

• I would recommend changing "100,000~" to "Around 100,000 (estimated)" or something like that.
  • Y
• The belligerents section is somewhat confusing (naturally, as the conflict itself was). Perhaps try putting some dates in to make this clearer, if this doesn't help we can look at other options.
  • In my opinion, this is about as clear as it can get! TBH, what is called the "Congo Crisis" is basically a string of separate wars and they don't really lend themselves to infobox format. Per wiki guidance about not cluttering the already-stuffed infobox, I'm fairly reluctant to add dates - not least because there's little consensus on most of them anyway!
    • OK then, never mind. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
• "in the Republic of the Congo (modern-day Democratic Republic of the Congo)" perhaps "in the Republic of the Congo (today's Democratic Republic of the Congo)"
  • Y - replaced with "today the...", is that OK?
• I'd recommend changing "soon after" to "days after"
  • This I'm reluctant to do. There's no concensus on exactly when it started (current infobox uses the date of independence itself. Days after implies a known amount of time!
    • "Soon after" in a historical context generally means several weeks if not months. We really must make clear that the crisis began less than two weeks after independence. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
      • The problem is that it's not clear when it begun! I'd be loathed to say it begun at independence (even though we should certainly use this for the infobox dating), but to say it begun at the FP mutiny or another event soon after would surely be WP:OR. I'd certainly agree that "soon" is not preferable, but it implies an intangible amount of time following. "Days" would imply 1-7 actual days after independence and, as such, a known and finite quantity of time. If you're sure, I will certainly change it, but just so you can see where I'm coming from.
• "The crisis began soon after the Congo received independence from Belgium" perhaps "The crisis began days after the Congo became independent from Belgium"
  • See above.
• "under the regime of"—regime is a loaded word that can imply authoritarianism, illegitimacy and general negativity, so I recommend against its use. perhaps "under the control of" or "under the government of"
  • Mobutu was a dictator but I can certainly see your point here. The problem is that "government" doesn't really cover the full scope of it (just politics?), and "control" sounds a bit weaker...
    • I'm not saying Mobutu wasn't a dictator, but that fact is neither here nor there, as you acknowledge. The point is neutral wording. Perhaps "under the rule of"? —Cliftonian (talk) 17:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Y Changes made across the article. I've several of the terms you suggested.
• "and both United States and Soviet Union supported opposing factions." perhaps "with the Soviet Union and United States supporting opposing factions" (in these situations I find it is better to use alphabetical order; putting the U.S. first here could lead to accusations of Americocentrism and/or bias)
  • Y
• The second paragraph of the lead was very long so I split it at "The involvement of the Soviet Union"
  • No problem, thanks!
    • Cheers —Cliftonian (talk) 17:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
• "In the 1950s, a nationalist movement had developed in the Belgian Congo demanding its independence. When it became independent on 30 June 1960, Congolese politicians had only had minimal time to prepare. Many issues, such as the role of ethnicity and federalism, remained unresolved. Soon after independence ..." Perhaps "A nationalist movement in the Belgian Congo demanding the end of colonial rule led to the country's independence on 30 June 1960. Minimal preparations had been made and many issues, such as the questions of federalism and ethnicity, remained unresolved. Days after independence ..."
  • Y - "Days" subject to comments above.
• "a well-known and charismatic leader" according to whom?
  • I hope this is explained below!
• We say in the lead that Lumumba requested Soviet assistance but not that it actually came. Perhaps change "The involvement of the Soviet Union" to "Prompt Soviet intervention on Lumumba's side"
  • Y
• "with himself in power behind the scenes" perhaps "effectively under his control"? and also perhaps mention this was "in the capital Léopoldville"—"and established a new government, effectively under his control, in the capital Léopoldville."
  • Y
• "A rival government, based in the eastern city of Stanleyville, was founded by followers of Lumumba, led by Antoine Gizenga, and opposed to the central government in Léopoldville but was soon crushed." Perhaps "Antoine Gizenga and other Lumumba supporters set up a rival government in the eastern city of Stanleyville in late 1960, but this was crushed by the start of 1962."
  • Y - slightly different addition, but changed anyway.
• "Meanwhile in Katanga, after the UN Secretary-General, Dag Hammarskjöld, was killed in an airplane crash. His successors in the UN took a more aggressive stance towards the secessionists." check grammar.
  • I'm afraid I can't see the problem! What isn't correct? ;)
    • Either remove the word "after" after the first comma ("Meanwhile, in Katanga, the UN Secretary-General ...) or change the full stop after "crash" to a comma. Also consider substituting "aeroplane" for "airplane" (are we using British or American-style English? either one is okay but be consistent). —Cliftonian (talk) 17:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Y
• "By the beginning of 1963, both Katanga and South Kasai secessions had been put down with UN support." perhaps "Supported militarily by UN peacekeepers, Léopoldville defeated the secessionist movements in Katanga and South Kasai by the start of 1963."
  • Y
• "The end of the Katangan secession marked an attempted reconciliation in 1964. A new compromise constitution was adopted and the Katangan leader, Moise Tshombe, was recalled from exile to head a new interim government." Perhaps "The end of the Katangese secession preceded an attempted reconciliation in early 1964—a new compromise constitution was adopted and the Katangese leader, Moise Tshombe, was recalled from exile to head an interim government."
  • I'm afraid I think this is less clear in one sentance. I'll rephrase it, but I feel that keeping it in two sentences is preferable.
    • OK—we can come back to it later if need be anyway. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
• "In early 1964, an insurrection, known as the Simba Rebellion, broke out in the central and eastern Congo. The rebels, who were broadly inspired by Maoism, managed to take control of a significant amount of territory and even formed a Communist state, the People's Republic of the Congo, in Stanleyville." However, a second civil war then began with the uprising of Maoist-inspired rebels known as the "Simbas" in the east of the country. The Simbas took control of a significant amount of territory and proclaimed a communist state, the "People's Republic of the Congo", in Stanleyville."
  • Y
• "Government forces gradually began retaking territory and, in November 1964, Belgium and the United States launched a military intervention to recover whites in Stanleyville who had been taken hostage by the rebels." Perhaps "Léopoldville gradually retook territory and, in November 1964, Belgium and the U.S. intervened militarily to recover whites in Stanleyville who had been taken hostage by the Simba rebels."
  • Y
• "(later re-named Zaire)" why not "renamed Zaire in 1971"?
  • Y
• "Around 100,000 people are believed to have been killed during the crisis between 1960 and 1965." I'd move this to the end of the first paragraph, and rephrase "believed" to "estimated". Also not sure we need "between 1960 and 1965" at the end.
  • Y

Back to continue later. —Cliftonian (talk) 13:36, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Have posted some replies to your replies above, will continue the review tomorrow. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

I did a bit of copyediting, mostly in the lead. Okay, now on with the review. —Cliftonian (talk) 11:25, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Background

• "lack of international power"—I think he was frustrated more by the lack of prestige than the lack of power, wasn't he? Taking control of the Congo was expensive and inconvenient—hence the Belgian government's refusal to go along with Leopold on it—and it didn't really make Belgium more powerful either. (The "Congo Free State", incidentally, has to be one of the most hilariously deceptive place names in history.)
• where we are using the word "Western" in a political sense ("Western nations", "the West" etc) it should be capitalised.
• "By 1908, however, news of the violence of Congo Free State officials and of the ruthless system of economic extraction led to international pressure for Belgium, as a neutral country, to take official control of the colony creating the Belgian Congo." Try "By the turn of the century, however, the violence of Free State officials against indigenous Congolese and the ruthless system of economic extraction had led to intense diplomatic pressure on Belgium to take official control of the country, which it did in 1908, creating the Belgian Congo."
• "state and company interests" try "the interests of the government and private enterprise"
• "by the native population" try "by the indigenous population" (bit of variation in prose, the word "native" is used again in the next sentence)
• explain very briefly that indirect rule meant basically leaving the natives' traditional leaders in positions of authority under colonial oversight. Also I believe this system was only used in a minority of British colonies.
• "There was a high degree of racial segregation, and although immigration brought whites from across the social spectrum, they were always treated as superior to blacks." Perhaps "There was a high degree of racial segregation. Immigration brought whites from across the social spectrum, but they were always treated as superior to blacks."
• "urbanization" or "urbanisation"? are we using American spellings or British spellings? (or Oxford spellings?) Judging from the spelling of the word "programme", British?
• "the colonial administration begun" again, this needs to be "began"
• "twice the size of that in any other African colony" twice the size in actual terms, or in proportional terms? (what were the black and white populations of the Congo at the time, just before independence? this will help the reader considerably)
• "both the United States and Soviet Union" as above, consider putting the Reds first when you mention both sides
• "and in opposition with each other" perhaps "and opposed to each other"
• "among others, Lumumba," we haven't introduced Lumumba yet.
• "main competitor" main rival?
• "a more radical party" a more radical ideology?
• "a localist party led by Moise Tshombe which advocated federalism and primarily represented the southern province of Katanga" perhaps "a localist party led by Moise Tshombe that advocated federalism and chiefly represented the southern province of Katanga"
• "These included the Parti Solidaire Africain (PSA) of Antoine Gizenga" give a few words on what the PSA advocated? (non-ethnic socialism?)
• "Although the majority independence party" perhaps "Although it was the largest of the pro-independence movements ..."
• "which took different stances on a number of issues and was increasingly polarized between moderate évolués and the more radical mass membership" I would split this: "that took different stances on a number of issues. It was increasingly polarised ..."
• "In July 1959, Ileo and supporters of Albert Kalonji split the party, creating a more radical faction but it failed to achieve mass defections." Perhaps "A radical faction headed by Ileo and Albert Kalonji split away in July 1959, but failed to induce mass defections."
• "As a result, the remaining majority of the MNC took the name MNC-Lumumba (MNC-L) but the split also divided the MNC between the Lumumba-ists who held the Stanleyville region and its faction, which became the MNC-Kalonji (MNC-K) which attracted support in Élisabethville and among the luba ethnic group." I don't understand this sentence. What is "its faction, which became the MNC-Kalonji"? Also "Luba" should be capitalised, shouldn't it?
• You haven't explained yet what the Force Publique was. perhaps just say "The Force Publique, the colonial gendarmerie" or something like that.
• "49 people were killed" Don't start a sentence with numerals. (either put "Forty-nine people were killed" or rephrase)
• We refer to the "European community" in some parts of the article and the "white community" in others. We should stick to either one or the other (except in quotes). I personally prefer "white", as in the lead
• "to pay takes" taxes?
• "the report of a working group" a working group of what? The Belgian government?
• perhaps wikilink Brussels?
• In the image caption make clear the conference was in Brussels
• "Lumumba was released from prison before the conference following his arrests after riots in Stanleyville." maybe "Lumumba, who had been arrested following riots in Stanleyville, was released in the run-up to the conference and took part."
• "Although the Belgians had originally hoped for a thirty-year period before independence, under Congolese pressure, the conference set a date for Congolese independence in 30 June 1960.[26] The delegates, however, failed to agree on other matters including federalism and the post-independence role of Belgium.[27]" Perhaps "The Belgian government had hoped for a period of at least 30 years before independence, but Congolese pressure at the conference led to 30 June 1960 being set as the date. The delegates failed to agree on matters including federalism, ethnicity and the post-independence role of Belgium."
• "Belgians began campaigning against Lumumba who they wished to marginalize, accusing him of being a Communist and supported rival ethnic-based parties like CONAKAT." perhaps "Belgians began campaigning against Lumumba, whom they hoped to marginalise; they accused him of being a communist and supported rival, ethnic-based parties like CONAKAT."

Independence

• "As planned, the end of colonial rule in the Congo, and the proclamation of the independent Republic of the Congo, occurred on 30 June 1960." perhaps "The proclamation of the independent Republic of the Congo, and the end of colonial rule, occurred as planned on 30 June 1960."
• "as the culmination of the" we use this wording twice in short succession; perhaps change "presented independence as the culmination of the nationalist movement" to "described independence as the crowning success of the nationalist movement" or something like that
• "Kasa-Vubu was proclaimed President, and Lumumba Prime Minister, of the Republic of the Congo." This lacks an inline citation.
• Perhaps reorganise the explanation about the first government. Explain first that it was a semi-presidential system, then say that Kasa-Vubu was President and Lumumba PM. I think this is clearer.
• "Despite the demands of some parties, it was also largely centralist and did not leave devolve significant power to provincial level." uncited

Will continue later —Cliftonian (talk) 11:25, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! I hope I've made or responded to all the new points above, but please let me know if any of them have been missed by mistake... Brigade Piron (talk) 17:00, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

I'll have a look through point by point but it looks generally good from first glance. Will continue the review tomorrow. Are we using British or American spellings? —Cliftonian (talk) 17:08, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Good point. Personally, I don't mind. There doesn't seem to be an obvious choice either way and, although it pains me to admit it, I'm not entirely sure of the difference (certainly between Oxford and Briteng)! Feel free to implement whichever you'd prefer.Brigade Piron (talk) 17:23, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

It seems to be tagged for BrE at the moment so we'll keep it that way, I see no reason to change it. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:35, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Beginning of the crisis

I have done a bit of copyediting here myself. Just a query: "white civilians were requested to leave" by who? Léopoldville or Brussels? (or somebody else?) —Cliftonian (talk) 18:39, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! By Léopoldville, I believe! Brigade Piron (talk) 06:39, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

• The elections were held in May 1960, well after the conference where independence was secured for June 1960. Since independence had already been secured and was only a month away, why were they widely boycotted?
• "Lumumba's stance appeared to many Belgians to justify their prior concerns about his radicalism." Can you clarify this a bit? What about his stance? Did they think he was not trying hard enough to stop the mutineers/protect the whites?
• I think the Katangese declaration of independence is presented rather strangely—how exactly was independence declared? Who declared Katanga independent if it was not CONAKAT? Shouldn't more prominence be attached to Tshombe himself? Right now he isn't even mentioned in connection with the declaration of independence.
• Why don't we mention that Katanga had always provided a slight exception to the uniform native policy in the colonial Congo, coming under the Vice Governor-General of the colony rather than a provincial administrator? (see Turner p. 28)
• "the Belgian government provided troops to Katanga" did they actually give Belgian troops? I thought they provided Belgian officers etc to command Katangese troops.
• Perhaps clarify Katanga was never formally recognised by any country (right now it could be read to say simply that Belgium never formally recognised it).
• Why don't we mention that Tshombe presented himself as pro-Western, and contrast this to the image Lumumba had among many Western leaders by this time as an unreliable communist? We touch on this by mentioning the potential nationalisation of UMHK's assets but I think making it clearer would help to explain the Cold War angle on Katanga
• Luba or Baluba? If I understand correctly, transposing my knowledge from elsewhere in Africa, "Luba" means one of them and "Baluba" means plural (like Shona/maShona, Ndebele/amaNdebele, Tonga/baTonga). Either is okay but stick to one or the other for consistency.
  • I'm quite keen to keep this - there's already been some confusion caused by this (I've seen ABAKO erroneously referred to as the Alliance des Bas-Congo) and if anyone is inspired to read further, they're bound to come across it. Plus, while we can strip out "Baluba" and "Bakongo", we're still left with it in ABAKO! I've put a footnote in, linking to Bantu languages, which I hope will clarify any issues.Brigade Piron (talk) 16:26, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
• Why don't we mention earlier that Kalonji was the one who declared South Kasai's independence? (We've already introduced him? Ditto Tshombe)
• Maybe put a picture of Tshombe instead of the flag? Or a map showing the territories Katanga and South Kasai claimed? (I can help make one of these if you like)
  • Perhaps its a bit uninspired. I just hoped to avoid another big man picture (I did put Kasa-Vubu in because he's pretty important) and Katanga/South Kasai are marked on the rather nice 1961 map a couple of sections below. I though a flag might just add a bit of variety?Brigade Piron (talk) 20:41, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
• I don't think you need a capital C on communism

Back soon. —Cliftonian (talk) 15:11, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

If I recall correctly Katanga remained relatively quiet and under the rule of law and order while the rest of the Congo descended into anarchy. Is this correct and if so, shouldn't we mention it? —Cliftonian (talk) 08:32, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Foreign reaction and UN intervention

• Why not wikilink the UN Security Council? (Also perhaps in the first sentence when we first mention the UN mention the General Assembly)
• "who believed the UN would help suppress the secessionist states" make clearer the Léopoldville gov't expected the UN forces to take an active role in military operations against the secessionists.
• don't need capital C on communism
• "Soviet-backed Congo" perhaps "Soviet-aligned Congo"?
• "became involved in infighting between the Baluba and Bena Lulua ethnic groups" On one of the two sides, or "in the crossfire", so to speak?
• "The violence of the advance caused an exodus of quarter of a million Baluba refugees who left their homes to flee the fighting." No inline source
• "The involvement of the Soviet Union in the Congo alarmed the United States" We don't need "in the Congo", this is clear from context
• "hat Lumumba was Communist and worried that the Congo could be on track to become a strategic Soviet client state" this could read that it was Lumumba who was worried. Suggest redrawing grammatically
• "the CIA's agents in the region" perhaps "CIA agents in the region" (unless they all did so together, which seems unlikely)
• "Congo [is] experiencing [a] classic communist...takeover" "Congo" or "the Congo"? also put spaces either side of the dots, with a non-breaking space before ("communist ... takeover")

Central government split and first Mobutu coup

• Big W on Western
• Don't need "international", by nature pressure from other countries is international
• perhaps rephrase to "pressure from several Western countries for his removal."
• "who they believed to be" could be taken to imply that this was not actually the case. perhaps "who they saw as"
• "used his power to stop communications by Lumumba's faction" how?
• "announced that he had unilaterally dismissed Lumumba on national radio" perhaps "announced on national radio that he had unilaterally dismissed Lumumba"
• "Allegedly" according to whom?
• Where was Lumumba under house arrest? In Léopoldville?
• "Kasa-Vubu was dismissed and a moderate, Cyrille Adoula, appointed in his place.[57] In 1961, Kasa-Vubu was removed as President and replaced by Joseph Ileo" Sounds like Kasa-Vubu was removed twice?
• "they formed a rebel government" perhaps "rival"—I'm sure its supporters didn't consider it a rebel government
• After the Stanleyville gov't fell apart, did the states that had recognised it as the legitimate government of the Congo immediately stop doing so?

Murder of Lumumba

• "Lumumba escaped house arrest" how? there were UN and Congolese troops around the house, somebody must have helped him out?
• "for due legal process to Kasa-Vubu" turn this around: "to Kasa-Vubu for due legal process"
• Security Council needs capital letters
• "disarming of the forces of Mobutu" perhaps "disarming of Mobutu's forces"
• "by a vote of 8–2" do we know who voted for and against? (presumably China voted against with the Russians?)
• Why did the Congolese gov't give Lumumba to Katangese troops? Weren't they fighting each other?
• "The Belgian Embassy in Yugoslavia was attacked by protestors in Belgrade" spelling of "protesters"; also perhaps reword to "the Belgian Embassy in Belgrade, Yugoslavia"
• "violent demonstrations occurred in London and New York" perhaps mention who the demonstrators were? I just looked at the supporting BBC "On This Day" article and it said Joshua Nkomo and Kenneth Kaunda were at the London protest. (Tony Benn and Fenner Brockway were there too but they are not as pertinent from an African viewpoint.)

More later —Cliftonian (talk) 16:20, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

United Nations escalation and the end of the Katangese secession

• "the UN had issued" by when?
• "comprised nearly 20,000 men" from where? We mention Irish, Ghanaian, Swedish, Indian in the course of the article, but I think there were Canadians and Ethiopians too?
• "Indian troops acting against their orders" make clear these were UN troops, otherwise some might be confused
• "The Katangese made further provocations" like what?
• "Tshombe signed the Kitona Declaration" when?
• "reached a deadlock over the issue of federalism" in what regard? what did they not agree on?
• "Belgium's increasing reluctance to support Katanga demonstrated that the state could not survive indefinitely" but hadn't Tshombe already given in and relinquished Katanga's claim to independence when he signed the Kitona Declaration? Ditto why did the fighting continue after he signed this? Or did the declaration not mean anything?
• "clashed near Élisabethville and fighting broke out" you don't need both of these clauses, they mean the same thing
• "After attempts to reach as cease-fire failed" as should be "a", and who was attempting to broker a cease-fire?

Attempted political reconciliation

• "known as the Constitution of Luluabourg" why? was it drawn up there?
• "and appeasing federalists" should be "and appeased federalists"
• "6 to 21" numbers under 10 should be written in full: "six to 21"
• "and giving them more autonomy"
• "The constitution also changed the name of the state from the Republic of the Congo to Democratic Republic of the Congo." Was this done simply to reduce confusion with Congo-Brazzaville, or were there other motives for changing the name?
• "western powers" needs capital W
• "a constitutional referendum in 1964" when exactly?
• "fresh elections were scheduled for 30 March" what year?
• " and the Simba Rebellion broke out" you don't need this, the following section makes this very clear

Simba rebellion

• Capital R or not on "rebellion"?
• "Revolution broke out" perhaps "Insurrection broke out" or "Rebellion broke out" or similiar, "revolution" generally means specifically an uprising that succeeds in overthrowing the government (Russian Revolution, Cuban Revolution, American Revolution etc)
• "or "Simbas" (from the Kiswahili for "lion")" I think they called themselves the Simbas, right? Or was it a nickname applied by somebody else? Say
• "loosely based on Communism" don't need capital C on communism
• "The Simbas used magic to initiate members" what kind? how?
• Tonkin Gulf Incident, not Incidence
• "there were rumours that, had the rebellion not been rapidly defeated, a full-scale American military intervention could have occurred as in Vietnam" rumours where? among whom? does any serious commentator think the U.S. might have intervened in the Congo as it did in 'Nam?

Suppression and Belgian and American intervention

• "Albertville and Lisala were both recaptured" don't need "both"
• "used on his experience" does not make sense
• "mostly white settlers" how do we know they were settlers specifically? At least some of them would have been born in Africa.
• "5 Command" typo
• "but were known for widespread unsanctioned killing, torture, looting and mass rapes in recaptured rebel areas" why not mention that according to Gleijeses on p. 79, Hoare described his own men as "appalling thugs" in a conversation with a British journalist, Colin Legum?
• Second paragraph here is long, recommend split at "The paratroopers and the civilians returned to Belgium"

Second Mobutu coup d'état

• I think this would do better as a second level header, staying under "Simba rebellion" (the short section is unattractive)
  • I'm keen to keep this separate, though I agree it does look a bit odd. The thing is, not only is it the terminal event of the crisis (and therefore important) but it occurred months after the end of the Simba Rebellion. I don't think it could be moved without harm Brigade Piron (talk) 19:26, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
• "a large part of his party soon defected" why?

Aftermath and legacy

• Generally looks well done. But why don't we mention the renaming of cities (Léopoldville/Kinshasa, Stanleyville/Kisangani, Élisabethville/Lubumbashi etc?)
  • I think this is covered by Authenticité (Zaire). Don't forget that it's not just the big cities of Léopoldville etc., but frankly I think explaining Port-Empain, Albertville etc. doesn't add much and I think you'd have to do all of them in the same article. If you like, I'm happy to put a footnote in next to the first mention of a city with an explanation of the later changes and a link to Former place names in the Democratic Republic of the Congo? Brigade Piron (talk) 16:26, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Political legacy

• Perhaps add a little bit about how Lumumba in death became an iconic figure? (we hint at this by mentioning the Unified Lumumbist Party, but make it clearer)
• should be the United Lumumbist Party
• "Following the fall of Mobutu, Antoine Gizenga founded a political party, Unified Lumumbist Party (PALU), and served as Prime Minister between 2006 and 2008." no inline citation

Historical controversy

• need capital W on Western
• recommend replacing "murder" with "killing", which is less evocative and more neutral

International importance

• "re-integrated in Nigeria" into, not in
• capital W on Western

I think you have done a very good job overall of summarising this important subject, and I enjoyed reading the article, but unfortunately I feel it falls short in a few places when it comes to the strict details, and there are a few minor issues with grammar and prose, so I am placing this on hold for now. I think it's close to getting GA though. I hope the notes above help out. Let me know if there's anything I can do. Cheers, and thanks again for working on this important article. —Cliftonian (talk) 09:28, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Sorry for the lack of progress; I hope that all the points have been addressed except the citation (flagged in article) and Lumumba legacy which I'll get to. Brigade Piron (talk) 16:26, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Don't worry at all. I won't be impatient with this review, so don't rush. Post a note when you're done and we'll continue. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:14, 31 July 2014 (UTC).

Checklist

A lot of issues I raised above remain unaddressed but I think these can wait until FAC (though if you can find time to make these improvements before that, great). I'm quite comfortable this is close to being a GA now. Just a few things I would like to iron out first —Cliftonian (talk) 11:56, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   Looks generally well written.

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

   I think so, yes.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   Well done.

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   We say Gizenga "served as Prime Minister between 2006 and 2008", but the source is from 2007. "The paratroopers and the civilians returned to Belgium and the Belgian politician, Paul-Henri Spaak, was called to the UN to account for the operation and to respond to accusations of neocolonialism." is not cited inline.

   Both have been rephrased and cited. Believe it or not, no RS reports Gizenga's 2008 resignation (plenty of blog posts and Congolese diaspora newspapers of questionable quality). I've just said that he was "elected" in 2006. Considering the scope of the article, that should be enough.Brigade Piron (talk) 21:08, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

   C. No original research:

   Nothing major anyway.

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

   Well done overall; a very good summary, particularly for the lay reader

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

   No major issues.

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

   One main contributor, no edit wars.

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   Look basically OK except question marks over File:Katanga Gendarmes.jpg (how do we know this was first published in Katanga/the Congo? Where was it first published?) and the images from http://www-cgsc.army.mil/ (including the lead image). The source is a deadlink and no author information.

   To be honest, I think we have to assume good faith. There's no reason why, even if we found it in a reputable book, it would give the country of first publication. In the circumstances, I think this is a reasonable compromise. The www-cgsc.army.mil is a reputable website and is indeed operated by the US army (therefore of use to us) but I think it fell down a while back. That shouldn't be much of a problem anyway.Brigade Piron (talk) 20:26, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

   OK, I'll let this slide for GA, but keep in mind tha reviewers will be much more strict at FA. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   As I said above, a good outline overall and while I think there is quite a long way to go before FAC, I think the article is very close to GA. Just fix the issues I have outlined in this checklist and I will pass the article for GA. —Cliftonian (talk) 11:56, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

   Passing for GA—I think this meets the standards now. Well done. Please keep in mind what I have said above about continuing towards FAC. This article is very good already but it has the potential to be a real masterpiece. I'm more than happy to carry on lending a hand if you like. Well done again and good luck! :) —Cliftonian (talk) 17:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC)