Talk:Battle of Masan

Commentary
A good article, definitely B-class. Here are some comments, mostly minor and easily fixed: Like I said, mostly minor stuff. The subject is treated well in an appropriate amount of detail, and due regard is given to the actions of individual units that isn't seen often enough in historical texts. Good luck. Boneyard90 (talk) 16:05, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Add re-direct links to the first mention of "Task Force Smith" and "burp gun".
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 02:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Remove dead re-direct links that salt the article, esp. the latter half.
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 02:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Subjective descriptors: Certain subjective terms can be difficult to conceptualize for the reader, without some precedent reference to numbers. In the section Battle of Masan, the use of "wiped out" implies >90% KIA; the use of "almost completely destroyed" conveys the idea of 60-90% casualties, as opposed to KIAs only; the reason being that the "destruction" of a unit is often related to the incapacitation of its combat effectiveness, thus the destruction or loss of equipment in addition to the loss of killed, wounded, captured, or missing personnel.
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 02:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Unit Typo?: In the section Battle of Masan, the 24th Infantry Division is referred to (directly) twice, and indirectly several times. I suspect that either the 25th Infantry Division or the 24th Infantry Regiment is meant here, but as it is, it's quite confusing.
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 02:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * A or AN ROK?: In the section Battle of Masan, the 4th para. refers to "an ROK patrol". Shouldn't the article be "a"? I usually hear the acronym "ROK" pronounced "rock", but I understand if you're treating it as an abbreviation, "are-oh-kay". Is there any guideline on this?
 * All the references to it I've seen in literature refer to "an ROK" so I've tried to just be consistent with them. — Ed! (talk) 02:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Date Format: In the last paragraph of Battle of Masan, the date format switches between a civilian format (September 1) and a military format (5 September).
 * Fixed. — Ed! (talk) 02:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I have responded to everything. Thanks for the review! — Ed! (talk) 02:38, 4 January 2011 (UTC)