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

Reviewer: MrLinkinPark333 (talk · contribs) 02:17, 4 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello again! I thought I'd review this article to help ease me back into GA Reviews. Plus, I've reviewed a previous one of yours before. If you have any comments/concerns, please feel free to ping me here in the review.

Lead/Infobox Y

• Their website is now at dot org, not dot com. Minor point. - Fixed Y
• "John Akii-Bua's gold medal and world record in the men's 400m hurdles was the first gold won by a Ugandan athlete at an Olympic Games" - I think his gold/word record should be separate sentences as it sounds like his world record was the first gold, which isn't the case. - Done Y
• "41-year-old Elly Kitamireke of the field hockey team remains the oldest Ugandan athlete to have competed at an Olympic Games." - maybe mention that he was the oldest in 1972 or he became the oldest in 1972, like you mentioned Musani became the youngest. - Added Y

Background

P1 Y

• "despite still being a British protectorate at the time." - "despite" needs to be reworded per WP:Editorializing for neutrality. - Done Y
• "competing under its own flag for the first time at the 1964 Summer Olympics." - Commonwealth doesn't mention Uganda competed at 1964 Olympics. Extra source needed. - DoneY
• "7,114 athletes competed in 193 events across 23 sporting disciplines" - according to Olympics.org, it should be 7,134 athletes in 195 events, so Olympic Reference is a little bit inaccurate. - AmendedY
  • As for the sporting disciplines, it's 28 according to 1972 Summer Olympics#Sports, but I haven't found a source that confirms it yet.Y

    I think there's confusion over what term means. Sports Reference lists individual sports while our page includes different formats for what Sports Reference classes a single discipline. If you count only the sports with the logos on the Wiki page , these would also make 23. Kosack (talk) 20:30, 8 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    • According to Olympics, Displicine are branches of sports. But even counting the flags would be wrong, as Diving, Swimming and Water polo are all part of Aquatics, making it 21, not 23. See also here. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:41, 10 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Removed the mention of it's becoming too problematic. Kosack (talk) 08:18, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • Fair enough. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:15, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

P2/P3 Y

• Perhaps it would be worth mentioning that 1972 was Uganda's fifth Olympics? - Added Y
• "The delegation contained five athletes who had competed at the 1968 Summer Olympics in Mexico City." - true. I think adding the 1972 roster citation as well to this sentence could help with verification. If you think this is redunadnt, as it's already cited in the previous sentence, then it's okay to leave it. - Added Y
• "This was the first time Uganda had entered athletes in a discipline other than boxing and track and field." - This one is a bit of Original Research. On one hand, the 1972 Uganda roster does have hockey in it, but doesn't show it was their first time they competed outside of boxing and athletics. As for the Uganda overview page, it does not state which sports they competed in each year, unless you click on a specific Olympic year. Therefore, I think either the prose needs to be adjusted to reflect what Olympic Reference does say, or swap out the Uganda overview page source for one that verifies this statement. - Removed Y
• "In doing so, he won a bronze medal, one of only two won by Uganda" - sounds a bit off for prose, especially with "one of only two won". If you mean Rwabwogo won one of two medals for Uganda, then this needs rewording - Tweaked  Note: - see next point.Y
  • I think the word "only" sounds a bit not netural and needs to be dropped. The rest of the sentence sounds fine. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC) - RemovedYReply[reply]
• "The International Olympic Committee (IOC) withdrew Rhodesia's invitation due to mounting political pressure." - Kinda. I don't see BBC saying the IOC withdrew their invitation, but they did pass a vote to approve Rhodesia's exclusion because of the political pressure. - Reworded  Note: - see next point.Y
  • "The International Olympic Committee (IOC) expelles Rhodesia" -> expelled (per past tense). --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC) - Fixed typo YReply[reply]
  • Also, I do see the In Context box in the BBC article say Rhodesia was not allowed to compete because they didn't have the right travelling documents. However, that might be too detailed to add here in the Uganda article. Thought I mention this, but you do not need to include it.Y

    I'll leave that if you're OK with it. As you say, it's a little detail heavy. Kosack (talk) 10:10, 4 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    • Works for me. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:02, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Athletics

P1/P2 Y

• "Uganda significantly increased its participation in track and field events for the 1972 Games," - I recommend dropping "significantly" for neutrality. - Done Y
• "entering nine athletes compared to three at the 1968 Games" - eight athletes, not nine. - Done Y
• "the first the nation had entered since the 1964 Summer Olympics in Tokyo" - true. However, the 1964 Olympic Reference doesn't compare other Uganda rosters. The Uganda overview source does have it though, but doesn't mention the host city. Up to you if you want to cite both or swap the ref and adjust the prose. - Added Y
• "placing 59th out of 61 runners who finished the race" - 62 runners finished, not 61. - Done Y

P3 Y

• "He surprised many by winning his heat in first place before repeating the feat in his semi-final, beating his time in his heat by more than a second. In the final of the event, Akii-Bua was drawn in lane one, generally considered the more difficult lane to win from." - not verified by World Athletics, and not neutral with "He surprised many by winning his heat" and "generally considered the more difficult lane to win from". Note: see next point. Y

  Added a source for the lane, reworded elsewhere. Kosack (talk) 13:26, 4 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • "the more difficult draw" -> the most difficult draw. Also, not sure what it's meant by draw. Does it mean he was given lane one in a draw? Y --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Yes, athletes are drawn to determine which lane they compete in. Kosack (talk) 10:35, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    • Okay, I wasn't sure that's what it meant. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:03, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• "Despite this, he went on to win the race and set a new world record time for the event of 47.82 seconds, the first runner in history to record a time under 48 seconds in the 400m hurdles" - close paraphrasing issue here. Rewording would be needed to past limited wording.

  I've reworded slightly but there's little room for manoeuvre really when it's maintaining the facts of the record. Kosack (talk) 13:26, 4 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay. I think if "despite this" was removed, it'd be fine since it's a sentence full of details that can't really be reworded that much. Y --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:29, 5 March 2020 (UTC) - RemovedReply[reply]

• • Also, "despite" is a word to watch per editorializing.
• "the first African to win gold in an event shorter than 800m" - bit of close paraphrasing as well, but not as much as above. A slight rewording needed for limited wording.Y

  Reworded slightly. Kosack (talk) 13:26, 4 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Looks better. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:29, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Abraham Munabi is missing in the prose, but mentioned in the table under the field events. - Added Y

P4

• "The two female athletes, Judith Ayaa and Rose Musani, competed in the 400m and 200m respectively." - citation needed. - Done Y
• "aged 16 years and 28 days at the start of the Games" - As Musani was born on August 8, 1956, she wouldn't have been that age at the start of the Games, just the Games. - Done Y
• "She was the youngest athlete ever to compete for Uganda at an Olympic Games until boxer Charles Lubulwa entered the 1980 Summer Olympics aged 15 years and 206 days" - True, but again there's the issue of having to click on each year from 1956 to 1980 to verify it. The 1980 reference only verifies that Lubulwa was the youngest that year. While the Uganda overview does state that Lubulwa holds the record, it doesn't state that Musani was the previous youngest Ugandian before Lubulwa.

  The overview provides a link to each Olympic year in the nations history. Linking to every instance would be overkill, so an overview is the best option to format this I would say. Kosack (talk) 06:39, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • You're right that linking every year is citation overkill, and I'm not expecting you to link all of them. However, the overview / 1980 source does not confirm all of these facts. Both verify Lubulwa became the youngest and holds the record. Same problem with 1972 source saying Musani was the youngest for that Olympics. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:10, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • But the overview provides clear links to every Olympics which does verify the information given that it names the youngest competitor at each games. If there is a better suggestion as to how to format it, I'm happy to oblige. Kosack (talk) 20:26, 8 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Hmmm. If there was a source that did say Musani was the youngest Ugandan Olympic competitor ever in 1972, then the following citation (Lubulwa's profile in 1980) would be fine. Otherwise, only Musani being the youngest in 1972 and Lubulwa holding the record as of 1980 are verified, not before 1972. Tbat is to say, without having to merge/cite all of Uganda's team records before 1972. Or: 1) if there was a source that listed all of the youngest Ugandan competitors throughout the Olympics, that'd work too. 2) you could reword it with what the source does verify if you can't find any source to back it up. 3) You could merge the references into a citation bundle if you can't find any other source and want to keep this info. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:48, 10 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • Essentially the overview source does list the youngest competitors through its listing of each games but including all of the references would be overkill. The information is there and the overview page is the best way to format it that I can figure. I've added a hat note directing any readers, would this make it clearer? Kosack (talk) 13:27, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• "but was eliminated after finishing eighth" - slight reword needed for "but" for neturality/word to watch.

  I don't think the word has a neutrality issue here and does not fall foul of WP:EDITORIALIZING. Kosack (talk) 06:39, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • To me, "but" is giving more emphasis that she was eliminated after surpassing her best time. I think a more netural connecting word like "and" would be better. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:54, 10 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • That's really the point of the sentence, she was eliminated despite recording a better time. Being eliminated would be the overriding point given that it ends her participation. I don't think and really fits in terms of providing context in the sentence as it is. Kosack (talk) 07:48, 13 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• "She surpassed Musani by also qualifying from the quarter-final," - there's no mention of Musani in the Uganda Radio Network source.Y

  We've already established where Musani placed in the same paragraph. Kosack (talk) 06:39, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • In that case, I think "also" should be dropped in "She surpassed Musani by also qualifying" as it suggests Musani qualified in her quarter-finals race, but that's not the case. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:34, 7 March 2020 (UTC) - FixedReply[reply]
  • Also, Ayaa's placing in the quarter-final (3rd) is in the table, but missing from the prose. - Added Y
  • BTW, the source is at dot com, not dot net.

    They're both the same link, for some reason the .net takes you to .com while the .com has a link to .net. Kosack (talk) 06:39, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    • Hmm, yet the dot net link doesn't work for me and redirects to the main page. If you want to keep the dot net version with an archived copy, that'll work for me. It's not a hassle for GA purposes, thought I'd let you know. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:44, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tables Y

• For Ayaa and Musani, should the Track & road events header be renamed to Track events as they only did track events? Just wondering.Y

  No reason it should keep road if there were actually no road events included. Kosack (talk) 07:00, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Alrighty, no worries. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:45, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Boxing

P1

• " who reached the quarter-finals in the 1968 Games," - already mentioned in the Background section. - Removed Y
• "Four of the squad, Matthias Ouma, John Opio, Deogratias Musoke and Peter Odhiambo were also defeated in their first fights having all entered in the second round via byes or smaller pools." - Not verified with the Boxing 1972 ref and also not accurate. Ouma didn't receive a bye in the first round, but the rest did. The closest to the statement is this, but does not have the byes (individual profiles do). Note: see smaller pools point.

  Added individual profiles and reworded. Kosack (talk) 07:00, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Also, what do you mean by "smaller pools"?

    Some weight divisions had a lower number of entrants, i.e. a smaller pool to draw from. Kosack (talk) 07:00, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    • Okay then. Could you direct me to where Opio, Musoke and/or Odhiambo competed with smaller entries? For the Olympic Reference events, Light middleweight had 34, Featherweight had 45 and Lightweight had 37. To me, these aren't low numbers in comparasion to heavyweight which had 14. Their individual profiles do verify they qualified for the second round via byes. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:45, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • I've reworded to an uneven number of fighters which is more accurate. Kosack (talk) 15:08, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • Hmm. I'm not 100% about that. Example: Light middleweight had 34, yet there were many byes. So I don't think the number of competitors decided who received a bye or not. Also, this one isn't uneven. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:28, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          • They would still be uneven in terms of a draw. 34 would not work as it would leave 17 fighters in the next round for example, so the byes would even out the number for the following rounds. Kosack (talk) 09:37, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• In that case, the Boxing overall reference needs swapping as it doesn't show the amount of fighters per weight class without having to click on each Round one link. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:02, 13 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • As with the overview page, this is the best possible format to display the information, rather than linking every weight class which would require around 8 links. Kosack (talk) 08:01, 13 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

P2 Y

• "Light-flyweight James Odwori started his competition in good form" - "in good form" doesn't sound netural as it's praising Odwori. - Reworded  Note: see next point. Y
  • I think "strongly" should be dropped as it's emphasizing his wins. This is because even though Rwabwogo also had two TKOs, his matches aren't emphasized like Odwori is with the word strongly. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:55, 8 March 2020 (UTC) - DroppedReply[reply]
• "However, his tournament was ended when he was stopped by eventual silver medallist, North Korean Kim U-gil." - when you say "stopped", do you mean he beat his competitor? Both of his wins ended up with the referee stopping the match, so I'm not sure which instance of stop you mean.Y

  Stopped is a boxing term where a fighter defeats their opponent before the fight's scheduled run time via a KO, TKO or similar. The sentence says "he was stopped", so I'm unsure why there would be confusion here? Kosack (talk) 07:00, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I wasn't famillar with the terminology. The citation to U-gil works for me. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:30, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Also, Odwori's profile doesn't state U-gil was the silver medalist. - Done Y
• Finally, "however" is a word to watch that needs to be dropped for neturality.Y

  • Again, I don't think this is a neutrality issue. There is a clear connection between these two sentences Kosack (talk) 07:16, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    • It sounded like the next being emphasized over the other sentence. But, as you mentioned that both sentences are connceted, it's okay after a re-read. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:30, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• "The final Ugandan boxer, 1968 bronze medallist Leo Rwabwogo" - you already mentioned Rwabwogo won bronze in the Background section. Y

  True, but given that he went on to win another medal, I believe it provides context here rather than expecting the reader to remember all of the above. Kosack (talk) 07:16, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Fair point. However, it's later emphasized in "to surpass his finish at the 1968 Games" in that paragraph. In that case, I think his bronze could be put here in the surpass sentence as it relates more there. Having it both in the start and finish would be a bit redundant. If you want to keep it at the start, then I don't think the surpass part would be needed as you already mentioned it here in this section. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:03, 8 March 2020 (UTC) - Combined to second mention YReply[reply]
• "In the final, he fought Bulgarian Georgi Kostadinov who dominated the first two rounds. Despite Rwabwogo mounting a "heavy counter-offensive" in an attempt to recover during the third round, Kostadinov held out to win the gold, with Rwabwogo claiming silver." - doesn't sound netural as there's more emphasis on Rwabwogo's final match than everyone's elses match, especially with terms like "dominated the first two rounds", and "Despite Rwabwogo mounting a "heavy counter-offensive". Y

  Rwabwogo was fighting for a medal so there's a clear reason for the bout to be covered in more detail. Also, sources for individual fights are scarce. Kosack (talk) 09:45, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note: I'll have to request at the RX for a copy of the reference.

• • Update: I got a copy of the source. The quote is "heavy third-round counter-offensive", making this quote inaccurate. I don't think an ellipsis between heavy and counter-offensive would be suitable though as it's just two words in between them. Also, the source said Kostadinov won the first two rounds, not "dominate" those rounds. So, even with the source-check, these two parts are not correct. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:50, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  I've quoted heavy and used counter-offensive outside the quote instead if that's an issue. The source states "Kostadinov beat Rwabwogo for two rounds" which I would read to imply he was giving him a beating, so to speak. Especially given that, if Rwabwogo was forced to mount a counter-offensive, it would suggest Kostadinov was certainly on the offensive before this. Kosack (talk) 09:45, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • After a re-read, I think you're right. It's annoying how "beat" could be used for two different meanings. Also, the adjusted quote looks better. My final concern that just came up after a re-read is "in an attempt to recover during the third round". I don't see any mention of Rwabwogo trying to recover from his first two round losses, just his counter-offensive. I think this quote could be trimmed to "in the third round". Thoughts? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:09, 8 March 2020 (UTC) -Trimmed YReply[reply]

P3 Y

• "Rwabwogo's medal makes him the only Ugandan athlete to have won more than one Olympic medal in the nation's history." - True. But since the New Vision article was published in 2009, it'd need to be replaced with a source that shows this is still the case as of 2020. - Added Y
  • Nice find with the 2019 New Vision source! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:22, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• "He is also one of only three fighters" - I'd drop "only" for neturality, but this is minor. Y

  Again, I don't see a neutrality issue here. Three fighters in Olympic history is a miniscule amount. Kosack (talk) 09:45, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • To me, it seems like three is being emphasized with only. Maybe if it was rewritten something like: ""He is also only one of three fighters" that'd be fine. You don't have to rewrite it exactly like that though. If you feel that only is not emphasizing three, feel free to let me know. Y --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:22, 7 March 2020 (UTC) - RewordedReply[reply]
• "briefly tied him with Mukwanga until John Akii-Bua claimed the nation's first ever gold medal days later" - true, but New Vision doesn't give a timeline on how many days after Rwabwogo won silver did Akii-Bua win gold. So "briefly" and "days later" aren't verified. - Added Y
  • Akii-Bua's profile doesn't mention a date. If it'd be easier, you could drop "briefly" and "days later" as New Vision shows the order of who won which medals, but doesn't give dates only years. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:22, 7 March 2020 (UTC) - Switched refReply[reply]
    • Hmm. I see a contradiction with Olympic Reference. It says Rwabwogo won his silver on Sept 10th while Akii-Bua won his gold on Sept 2nd. However, New Vision has it the other way around. Thoughts on this? --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:11, 9 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • It seems Akii-Bua was definitely after, I've reworded to accommodate this. Kosack (talk) 15:08, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • I think this rewording works better. Nice solution! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 01:32, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Table Y

• Odwori's matches with Arsenal and El-Ashry were RSC, not TKO. Y
• Rwabwogo's matches with Acuña, O'Sullivan and McLaughlin were RSC, not TKO. Y

  Not sure if it makes a difference, but an RSC is just another term for TKO. [1] Kosack (talk) 09:45, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I thought they were separate things. Works for me then. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:25, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Just spotted this: a W for Rwabwogo in his match against Acuña is missing. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:56, 8 March 2020 (UTC) - Added YReply[reply]

Field hockey Y

Prose Y

• "Uganda entered a team in the field hockey event for the first time at the 1972 Games" - true, but not verified by the Uganda overview source at Olympic Reference.Y

  As above, the overview page is the best possible way to format this I feel. Linking to every Olympics page is highly impractical. Kosack (talk) 09:45, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I agree linking to every Olympic page would be useless as it's be citation overkill. Instead, I think this reference should be swapped with one that verifies it, as the overview page doesn't state this. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:33, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Managed to find an alternate source for this o e. Kosack (talk)^

  • Nice find! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:01, 9 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• "The 17-man squad included Elly Kitamireke...have ever competed at an Olympic Games" - I think this sentence should be split into two cause it's wordy. - Split Y
  • Citation needed to show seventeen competitors were on the Ugandan field hockey team. However, if you feel that passes WP:CALC, it's fine. - Added, to be sure Y
  • "aged 42 years and 16 days at the start of the Games" -> aged 41 years and 15 days at the Games (based on his profile). Note: see next point

    Amended the years, as the overview states the days exactly, I'd rather stick with that. Kosack (talk) 09:57, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    • If you want to keep that years/days, then "at the start of the Games" would need to be changed to "at the Games" like you amended for Musani. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:50, 7 March 2020 (UTC) - Done YReply[reply]

• "The squad was relatively unfancied and started the tournament with three straight defeats before holding Argentina to a goalless draw." - none of this is supported by the source. - Fixed  Note: see next point Y
  • Also, "relatively unfancied" does not sound netural. I recommend dropping this part unless a source does verify this. Y
  • Which part of the ESPN source is " The squad was relatively known" referring to? I do see that Bhurji was a gold medallist for India before the Games, but I don't see the whole team being famillar faces. I could have missed it. Y --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:57, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    That should have been unknown before autocorrect jumped in. Amended. Kosack (talk) 19:36, 9 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    • No worries! Realtively unknown would work as Bhurji seems to be the only known one. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 23:01, 9 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• "In the following game, played West Germany" -> In the following game, Uganada played West Germany - Done Y
• "A defeat to Belgium and a draw with Spain meant the side finished bottom of its group. The team did win its final match, a classification match against the side which finished bottom of the other group, Mexico." - none of this is verified by the source. - Fixed Y
  • Neither source show they lost to Belgium and drew to Spain. The classification match is good. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:57, 7 March 2020 (UTC) - Added YReply[reply]

Tables/Matches Y

• I think there should be a source for the matches/standings as it's currently unverified at the moment. - Added Y
  • Source does not verify the standings for Group A. It shows the final standings for all countries, and does not mention any points/games/results. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:01, 7 March 2020 (UTC) - Added YReply[reply]
• What does the numbers in the brackets mean? It doesn't seem to be wins/losses nor score. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:22, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I'm assuming it's the score at half-time during each game. I don't think it's particularly relevant so I've removed them anyway. Y Kosack (talk) 19:43, 9 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Overall

In this box, I'm using a question mark if the criteria needs some work, but isn't too bad. As I go along, this box might get updated. I've updated the box as it stands right now after reviewing it all:

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

I'll work on the rest later throughout the week. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 02:17, 4 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Update: Overall, there are issues throughout the article, some minor and some major after reviewing the rest of the article that hasn't been addressed yet.

• Minor: Handful of grammatical issues, few instances of words to watch, some redundant repeating of facts already mentioned in the background section, instances where the prose needs minor changes to be accurate i.e boxing results, age.
• Major: sentences where the source does not verify any of the sentence (heavily in the field hockey section), some non-netural phrasing like "dominate" and "relatively unfancied" that are not verified in the cited source.

As three of the criteria that needs to be worked on quick fixes, and since you've addressed most of the first round of comments, I'm willing to put this review on hold for a week. After that (March 12th), I'll recheck and decide whether to extend the hold or not. I don't think this article would go pass seven days of hold, but we'll see what happens in the meantime. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 21:51, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MrLinkinPark333: I've addressed all of the points raised above. Kosack (talk) 10:35, 6 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recap

@Kosack: Here's a recap of what's left to be addressed. Some of these I'm certain while others I wouldn't mind more discussion:

• Background: number of sporting disciplines
• Athletics: Source that shows Musani was the youngest ever Ugandian to compete before Lubulwa held the record, slight prose change to clarify Ayaa qualifyed in the quarterfinals while Musani did not.
• Boxing: Question about smaller entries for Opio, Musoke and Odhiambo as it doesn't look small in comparasion to heavyweight, "strongly" should be dropped to avoid emphasis of Odwori's match in comparasion to Rwabwogo, question about Rwabwogo trying to "recover" third round, whether "in an attempt to recover during the third round" should be trimmed or not, question about where Rwabwogo's bronze medal should be mentioned (start/finish of paragraph), question about whether three fighters is being emphasized with the word "only", "briefly" and "days later" not being verified for highest medal won by Uganda (more concerned about days later than briefly), with missing W in the table
• Field Hockey: Reference to show Uganda competed in Olympic field hockey for the first time in 1972, slight prose change to show Kitamireke was that age at the games and not the start, question about the Ugandian field hockey team being well known before the Games with the ESPN source (only Bhurji seems to be well known, not the enitre team), source that shows they lost to Belgium and drew to Spain, new source needed for Group A results, question about what the brackets mean in the table (Section Y )

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:51, 7 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@MrLinkinPark333: Addressed the remaining points. Kosack (talk) 19:43, 9 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Kosack: You're almost there:

• Background: dispciplines/sports number
• Athletics: Musani being the youngest Ugandan competitor before Lubulwa (I've left several possible options of how this can be resolved), different connecting word instead of "but" between Musani's improved time and quaterfinal finish, "also" needs to be dropped as only Ayaa qualified.
• Boxing: Queation about where smaller pools are verified by Olympic Reference for Opio, Musoke and/or Odhiambo in comparison to heavyweight, contradictory information between Olympic Reference and New Vision on whether Rwabwogo won his medal before or after Akii-Bua.

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:04, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• • I've responded to all those points above. Kosack (talk) 15:08, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• @Kosack: As this is March 12th, here's an overall summary. Most of the points have been addressed and there's only a few left to work through:

1), change of connection word to avoid stating even though she had an improved time, Musani didn't reach the quarterfinal (both are true, but her improved time wouldn't necessary mean she would have qualified), 2) source swapping to show the uneven boxing entries for the three weight classes.

As for the hat note for the youngest competitors from 1956-1972, I *think* this might be fine, but I might want to ask someone to check this doesn't fall under Original Research. Same thing after the uneven boxing entries is resolved, but I'm more concerned about the youngest competitor part. Your solution for the youngest competitors looks right, but I want to be 100% sure.

Therefore, as there's only a few points leftover, I'm willing to keep this on hold for a little bit longer. --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 00:15, 13 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Second Review request

@Kosack: After some debating, I decided a second review of these three points would be useful. I do understand your point of view with them, and I want to double check that there isn't any issue with them.

To the second reviewer, my questions are:

• 1) While Musani was the youngest Ugandan athlete ever in 1972 and Lubulwa broke that record in 1980, the links from 1956-1972 would have to be individually compared to confirm this. Is the hatnote in the Olympic Reference reference enough to pass Original Research or would citation bundling of the links from 1956-1972 be needed?
  • This is fine. It is straightforward to see how you could verify that statement just from that one source. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 19:29, 15 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• 2) In regards to boxers Opio, Musoke and Odhiambo, they did enter the second round via byes. However, my questions relates to "due to an uneven number of fighters in their pools". The overall boxing Olympic Reference doesn't mention this, and instead would require clicking on the Round one links at for Light middleweight, Featherweight and Lightweight. Would this be considered as Original Research? Also, would the byes due to uneven amount of competitors be classed as common knowledge per Bye (sports)? The individual boxing profiles / overall 1972 boxing reference don't specifically connect the byes to the amount of competitors.
  • This is also fine. It is common knowledge and not controversial that byes typically work this way. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 19:29, 15 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• 3) Is "In the quarter-finals, she recorded a marginally better time but was eliminated after finishing eighth" an instance of non-neturality? To me it is, as Musani's better time would not guarantee that she would qualify. With the word "but", it sounds like her elimination is being emphasized more than her better time. I think that a word that balanced the two halves together like "and" would be more netural.
  • "But" is correct. She did not advance even though she had a better time. "And" would be misleading, and would make it sound like she did not advance because she had a better time. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 19:29, 15 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

--MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:40, 14 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• MrLinkinPark333, I answered all three points above. Sportsfan77777 (talk) 19:29, 15 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Sportsfan77777: Alright. Thanks for the quick checkover. And as I saw that @Kosack: added a hatnote to the weight classes one as well, I'll pass this article as these issues have been double checked. Congrats! --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 19:32, 15 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]