Wikipedia:Peer review/Battle of Buna–Gona: Japanese forces and order of battle/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Battle of Buna–Gona: Japanese forces and order of battle[edit]

Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review as a step to GA. It has recently undergone a major re-order to deal with size moving material from Battle of Buna–Gona to Battle of Buna–Gona: Allied forces and order of battle and Battle of Buna–Gona: Japanese forces and order of battle, which were existing pages (renamed). It is hoped that a peer review will identify any issues arising from the move. The other articles have also been nominated for review. Regards, Cinderella157 (talk) 08:41, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: just a couple of comments/suggestions from me to get you started: AustralianRupert (talk) 11:38, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • "landing of reinforcements on the night of 18 November...": which year?
edit to lead Cinderella157 (talk) 08:23, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think a very brief "Background" section should be added straight after the lead to provide a little more context to the article;
Put a little more detail in lead. Does this give a little more backgroung? Cinderella157 (talk) 08:23, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that seems okay to me. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:19, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "US Corps Commander" --> commander of which corps?
Done Cinderella157 (talk) 08:51, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • " It consisted of: "several 75-mm naval guns, some 37-mm pom poms, 5 heavy anti-aircraft guns and a few 13-mms". --> "According to McCarthy, it consisted of: "several 75-mm naval guns, some 37-mm pom poms, 5 heavy anti-aircraft guns and a few 13-mms".
"McCarthy records, it consisted of:" Done? Cinderella157 (talk) 09:01, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that seems fine. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:19, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Lieutenant General Richard K. Sutherland, MacArthur's chief of staff": probably need to use MacArthur's full name and position here as it is the first mention of him in the body of the article
Done Cinderella157 (talk) 09:04, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Sanananda-Soputa": probably should use an endash
Done Cinderella157 (talk) 09:07, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "26 November 1942 as follows." – should probably end with a colon instead of a full stop
This is the end of a sentence, not a continuing list of punctuated text ultimately ended by a full-stop? Cinderella157 (talk) 11:28, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I feel that it is really a stem sentence, but I'm not going to die in a ditch over it. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:55, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nor am I. I asked for a third opinion from a resident grammar Nazi and will go with that. Cinderella157 (talk) 12:12, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not any kind of Nazi. As to the colon versus period, both look fine to me. But there's a typo there, I think, where "as at" should be "at" or "as of". Dicklyon (talk) 16:23, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Left one, fixed the other. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:15, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "See section – 'Strength at key positions'..." – "See the "Strength at key positions" section"?
Done Cinderella157 (talk) 09:31, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Horii was posthumously promoted from Major General to Lieutenant General" --> "Horii was posthumously promoted from major general to lieutenant general" per WP:MILTERMS
Done Cinderella157 (talk) 09:34, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The reinforcement in late December was from Yamagata's Brigade. The date of this reinforcement reported in the Center of Military History publication appears to be in conflict with other sources." --> "The reinforcement in late December was from Yamagata's Brigade. The date of this reinforcement reported in the Center of Military History publication appears to be in conflict with other sources which provide the date of X"
Does edit clarify as other sources provide differing but similar dates? See also para before for details. Cinderella157 (talk) 10:09, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that works for me. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:19, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you could create a second level heading called "Casualties", which could then include "Prisoners", "Evacuation" and "Number of Japanese killed" as third level headings
Done - though not certain if "Casualties" quite fits. Perhaps "casualties and losses". I take your point but prisoners aren't casualties? Cinderella157 (talk) 10:15, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Casualties and losses is indeed a better solution. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:19, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Battle_of_Buna–Gona:_Japanese_forces_and_order_of_battle/archive1&oldid=773167575"