- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article promoted by HJ Mitchell (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 08:30, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
« Return to A-Class review list[reply]
- Nominator(s): AustralianRupert (talk) and Nick-D (talk)
New Britain campaign (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Another collaborative effort between myself and Nick, this article covers the fighting on New Britain between December 1943 and August 1945. It is the parent article to the individual battle articles that Nick and myself have also developed over several years. The article recently underwent a successful GA nom and is now being brought here for further suggestions and improvement. Thank you to all who stop by. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 05:34, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Great article, an small but interesting piece of the Pacific theatre. A few comments:
- European-ethnic and Asian-ethnic are a strange combinations, could you trim them to European and Asian without losing meaning?
- suggest linking Collaborationism
- was Western New Guinea a proper name at the time, should it be western New Guinea?
- redlink 65th Brigade at first mention rather than further down
- "For the Arawe operation, a task force based on the 112th Cavalry" you've introduced Director Task Force, I suggest using it here
- suggest replacing "top cover" with a link to combat air patrol
- suggest just Sakai on second mention, same for Imamura, per WP:SURNAME
- probably just AIB instead of Allied Intelligence Bureau in the Talasea section, as it has been introduced before
- "or if Australian forces were expanded" what does this mean in this context?
- should there be a comma after "at Cape Gloucester easier"?
- are Morison and Miller US historians? If so, perhaps mention that.
That's me done. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:09, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- @Peacemaker67: G'day, PM, I have implemented these changes: [1]. Thank you for your time. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 03:24, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Image review
- Support
- I did the GA review for this and after reviewing the changes made as part of this review believe it also meets our A class criteria.
- My only suggestion is to swap the map out of the infobox for an image as the upscaled map currently "stretches" the infobox (minor nitpick / question of personal taste). Anotherclown (talk) 09:18, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
CommentsSupport from Factotem (talk) 12:38, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Nitpicky as ever...[reply]
- General comments from the style police:
- "in order to" is, I believe, generally deprecated in favour of simply saying "to".
- Some use of "with" where you mean "and", e.g. 3 times in Cape Gloucester, 1st para
- "whilst" is generally not liked (which is a nonsense in my opinion) but you have at least one instance of "whilst" but generally use "while"
- Japanese occupation, 3rd para, Further aircraft... More aircraft?
- Opposing forces, 1st para, ...while naval troops -> and naval troops?
- Preliminary Operations, 1st para, ...the units assigned to the South West Pacific Area, which was commanded by General Douglas MacArthur... "was" refers to South West Pacific Area, but the main subject of the preceding clause is "the units", which made "was" sound slightly wrong. Maybe just delete "which was" altogether?
- 3rd para, The goal of the attacks was to prevent the Japanese from using Rabaul as an air or naval base and to provide support for the planned landing on Bougainville scheduled for 1 November as well as landings in western New Britain planned for December. Long sentence, maybe a comma after 1 November?
- Opposing plans, 1st para, ...in the Cape Gloucester region of western New Britain and Gasmata... This tripped me up a little, because I thought that western New Britain and Gasmata were together part of the Cape Gloucester region, and not two separate landing sites. I think that "in the Cape Gloucester region of western New Britain and at Gasmata" clarifies it.
- Arawe, 1st para, not sure it's necessary to restate that Director Task Force was based on 112th Cav; that's already been covered.
- Cape Gloucester, 2nd para, In January 1944, as they sought to press their advantage further, another Dexterity operation was conducted on the New Guinea coast with a landing at Saidor as the Huon Peninsula was cleared by Australian and US forces "...as they sought to press their advantage...as the Huon Peninsula was cleared..." Found this awkward.
- In response, the Japanese high command at Rabaul ordered their forces withdrawing from the Huon Peninsula to bypass Saidor, and they subsequently began withdrawing towards Madang. Also found this awkward. I thought "...ordered their forces withdrawing from the Huon Peninsula..." was a typo for "...ordered their forces to withdraw...". Maybe "...ordered the forces that were withdrawing..." is better?
- Talesea, 2nd para, Extensive fortifications were constructed around the Gazelle Peninsula, whose rugged terrain would have also favoured the defenders. Doesn't "whose" require the possessor to be a person? Maybe "where" instead?
- Australian operations, 5th para, This involved establishing a forward base around Milim, which was achieved in mid-February 1945 by the 14th/32nd Infantry Battalion which was moved by barge via Sampun. which...which doesn't read quite right. Maybe "This involved establishing a forward base around Milim in mid-February 1945 by the 14th/32nd Infantry Battalion, which was moved by barge via Sampun."?
- 6th para, ...was heavily defended with mortars, machine guns and pillboxes, and heavy rain also frustrated Australian attempts to reduce the Japanese stronghold. Heavy fighting followed... Lots of "heavy". Maybe "strongly defended", "heavy rain" (as is), and "fierce fighting"?
- Following the capture of Waitavalo–Tol area in March–April... Looks like "Tol area in March" is a parenthetical statement. Maybe "Following the capture of Waitavalo–Tol area in March and April"?
That's me done. Factotem (talk) 12:38, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for these comments, Factotem, and your copy edits. I think I've gotten these now. These are my edits: [3]. Thanks for your time. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 01:05, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
