Talk:A Glorious Way to Die/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 13:17, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Hey Bruce, I'll be glad to take this one--comments to follow in the next 1-5 days. Thanks in advance for your work on it. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:17, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you for picking up this one – I look forward to your feedback. —Bruce1eetalk 13:33, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Okay, on first glance, this seems ripe for promotion. It gives a good sense of the book despite my not having read it, seems neutral in tone, and the sourcing looks good. The lack of criticism of the book may be a small issue, but it also clearly was well-received generally, so I doubt this will turn out to be a major neutrality problem. Here are my comments from my initial prose-checking pass; I'll do some source review and the checklist in a minute. Thanks as always for your contributions! -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:37, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


 * "was conceived to repulse the Allied advance" -- can it be clarified who conceived this (or what level of command)?
 * I've added "by Japanese commanders at Combined Fleet" for clarification. —Bruce1eetalk 15:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I put kamikaze in lower case, which I think is more common, but I see that Spurr seems to use the capital, so either is probably fine here. Feel free to revert me.
 * Spurr does put it in upper case, but I see the kamikaze article (mostly) uses lower case, so I think it's fine in lower case. —Bruce1eetalk 15:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Checklist

 * Thanks for the promotion, and for all your hard work at GAN. —Bruce1eetalk 15:27, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. This was an interesting read. -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:57, 12 November 2013 (UTC)