Talk:Landing at Saidor/GA1

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

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 06:33, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

same with Alamo Force., which should probably just be "Alamo Force" not "the Alamo Force" That's me done. Placing on hold for comments to be addressed. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:45, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I think the lead would bear combining paras one and two
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * is there a link for GHQ? And provide in full at first mention?
 * There is no link - the best we have is South West Pacific Area (command), which is already linked. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * suggest "With this operation completed" instead of "With the battle of Finschhafen won", there is tension and repetition between "Battle of Finschhafen" in one sentence and "battle of Finschhafen" one sentence later
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * suggest "his seaward left flank" instead of "his seaborne left flank". His flank wasn't actually seaborne, was it?
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * suggest "The opportunity to destroy"
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * what was Operation Backhander? A brief explanation would be helpful here, as it hasn't been mentioned before.
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * link Milne Bay
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Finschhafen is overlinked
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * link Bogadjim
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * link Sio, Papua New Guinea
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * General Martin should just be Martin
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * the assault on Cape Gloucester hasn't been mentioned previously. I know it is Backhander, but this just underlines why it needs to be spelt out earlier.
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * what were the operations at Arawe and Long Island? link?
 * Linked Arawe operation. We don't have one for the landing on Long Island. Do you want a red link? Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Only if it is notable. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:12, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Red-linked. I've added it to my to-do list. Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:04, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * General Krueger should just be Krueger
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * per MOS:TIME, 0650 should either be 06:50 or 6.50 am, same for other timings
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * do we know the destroyers involved in the naval gunfire support?
 * ✅ Sure. Added. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * LCP(R)?
 * Landing Craft Personnel, Ramped
 * ✅ Linked. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Australian-designed ARC mesh?
 * ✅ Australian Reinforcing Company - it's all over the place here. No article on the company though. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * suggest "American casualties on the day of the landing" I know D-Day is really generic, but given the primacy of 6 June 1944, it could be confusing.
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * General Adachi should be Adachi
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * is Hidemitsu Nakano likely to be notable? Redlink?
 * ✅ He didn't have an article when this one was written, but he does now. Linked. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * General Nakano should just be Nakano
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * link Hansa Bay at first mention
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * the Minderi River
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * "the Task Force" which task force? Not sure about the initial caps.
 * ✅ Michaelmas Task Force. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * ALAMO Force should be Alamo Force, a couple of examples of this
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * should the 128th Infantry be 128th Infantry Regimental Combat Team?
 * Nope. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Then it should probably be 128th Infantry Regiment at first mention. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:12, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅} Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:04, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * did the Hansa Bay operation have a name?
 * "Anchorage". Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Task Force again
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The Australian historian...
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * should "1st Battalion, 128th Infantry" be "1st Battalion Combat Team, 128th Infantry"?
 * Nope. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * But you have "1st and 3rd Battalion Combat Teams" elsewhere? I'm not familiar with the difference between US regiments and RCTs and US battalions and BCTs, but you should probably be consistent. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:12, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * An infantry regiment was a unit with a fixed Table of Organisation and Equipment (TOE). It varied during the war, but was 3,087 men in January 1944. For certain operations a regimental combat team (RCT) would be created by attaching artillery, engineers, medical, signals, etc. The regimental combat teams were ad hoc formations created for specific missions. The same applied to battalions. Each regiment had three battalions, and these could become the nucleus of a battalion combat team (BCT) by attaching combat support units. Normally a RCT or BCT would only be required if the regiment or battalion was operating separately from its parent division, or the division was spread out over a large area. Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:04, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * link First lieutenant, sergeant, lieutenant colonel and staff sergeant
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * suggest "attempted to make their way back"
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * to avoid the repetitious "but", suggest ending sentence at "American lines."
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * suggest "the landing" instead of "D-Day"
 * ✅ Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * how did the Cub get there?
 * On an LST with the wings removed. Unfortunately, I don't have a source for that. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:20, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I do have an image though. Added. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:32, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Task Force again
 * The images appear to have valid licences.

Comments by JennyOz Thanks for another interesting article Hawkeye. JennyOz (talk) 14:03, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Landing Craft, Personnel (Ramped) - goes to a dab page
 * ✅ Aargh. Fixed that. The APDs used the old plywood LCP(R) instead of the newer LCVP because the latter was too heavy for its davits. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:35, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * That stuff we call ARC reo is called rebar elsewhere - so you could use reinforcing steel (which redirects to Rebar) instead of the mesh link?
 * This is ARC mesh, not ARC rebar. ARC mesh looks like chicken wire, but with larger hexagons and a much stronger gauge wire. It is ubiquitously used in fencing. I found the right article, which is called chain-link fencing. But in this case it was laid on the sand to allow vehicles to drive over it. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:35, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Ditto. An interesting little operation. Looking forward to reading more about other operations of this campaign. This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, and is illustrated by appropriately license images with appropriate captions. Passing. Just a query before I do that; this article was assessed as A-Class for Milhist and other projects back in 2009. It has obviously changed quite a lot since then. Do you see it being brought back to GA-class for all projects now and possibly later going through Milhist ACR again? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:32, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * The purpose was so that the article could form part of a good topic. It remains A-class on Milhist. I may nominate it for FAC later in the year. Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:48, 17 May 2017 (UTC)