Talk:USS Kwajalein/GA1

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

Reviewer: Gatoclass (talk · contribs) 07:22, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * The detail with regard to Typhoon Cobra reads as WP:UNDUE to me. I suggest you cut it back to focus on the effects of the typhoon on Kwajalein and leave the other details to the typhoon article.
 * There's only a single paragraph which is setting up context for Typhoon Cobra, which I don't think is especially undue, as the circumstances which brought the carrier into the mess that it got into was rather extraordinary. Nonetheless, I've trimmed down that paragraph significantly. Stikkyy t/c 17:42, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * The detail with regard to Typhoon Cobra reads as WP:UNDUE to me. I suggest you cut it back to focus on the effects of the typhoon on Kwajalein and leave the other details to the typhoon article.
 * There's only a single paragraph which is setting up context for Typhoon Cobra, which I don't think is especially undue, as the circumstances which brought the carrier into the mess that it got into was rather extraordinary. Nonetheless, I've trimmed down that paragraph significantly. Stikkyy t/c 17:42, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
 * There's only a single paragraph which is setting up context for Typhoon Cobra, which I don't think is especially undue, as the circumstances which brought the carrier into the mess that it got into was rather extraordinary. Nonetheless, I've trimmed down that paragraph significantly. Stikkyy t/c 17:42, 19 March 2020 (UTC)


 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * Hi there,, I finally managed to get back to this after a very busy last couple of weeks. Now, there are some issues with the images.
 * First: File:USS Kwajalein (CVE-98) June 1944.jpg - the source page has expired and needs updating.
 * File:Christening of USS Kwajalein (CVE-98) with daughter Susan Ann, 4 May 1944.jpg - image licence looks highly dubious.
 * File:USS Kwajalein (CVE-98) transporting aircraft 1944.jpeg - I can't see any copyright information in the source.
 * File:Typhoon Cobra, 18 December 1944 east of Luzon.jpg - source page has expired.
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Sorry for the wait, I've had real life get into the way for quite some while. When I first saw the review, I saw only a single point that needed to be addressed, so I watchlisted the page and completely forgot about it. I've addressed your points. Stikkyy t/c 17:42, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Any update Gatoclass? Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 09:32, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, I did say I couldn't return to this due to a health issue, but I had a bit of an improvement recently so I might be able to after all. I'm a tad busy right now but will try to get back and take another look at this sometime over the next few days. Gatoclass (talk) 14:55, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I've addressed your points. Stikkyy t/c 06:18, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, if you're tied up in the RW, I'm happy to take over this review, I've already reviewed a number of ships of this class. Let me know? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:49, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Any update Gatoclass? Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 09:32, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, I did say I couldn't return to this due to a health issue, but I had a bit of an improvement recently so I might be able to after all. I'm a tad busy right now but will try to get back and take another look at this sometime over the next few days. Gatoclass (talk) 14:55, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I've addressed your points. Stikkyy t/c 06:18, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, if you're tied up in the RW, I'm happy to take over this review, I've already reviewed a number of ships of this class. Let me know? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:49, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Actually, the problem is not so much the RW as it is the fact that I rather recklessly opened 10 GARs plus 2 GANs of my own in a futile last-minute attempt to avoid elimination in the Wikicup, as a result of which I just have a little too much on my hands right now. But since I'm least confident about reviewing this particular nomination, I would be only too happy to hand it over to somebody with more experience in this area (and maybe I can learn something from your approach as well!). Many thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 09:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You are welcome, Gatoclass. Happy to help out. G'day could you just check this one against my comments on USS Savo Island, USS Admiralty Islands and USS Bougainville (CVE-100) and make sure any comments I made on those articles have been addressed here to save me repeating them if they have them in common? Then ping me and I'll complete the review. Thanks, Peacemaker67  (click to talk to me) 08:43, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I ported over the changes when you mentioned that you might take over the review. Stikkyy t/c 04:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Continuing review: That's all I could find. Placing on hold for the above to be addressed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:25, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * thanks for porting the other changes across to this one
 * suggest saying that Espíritu Santo was part of the New Hebrides, and add the same sort of geographical information for Guam, Manus Island, Ulithi
 * link Eniwetok and say where it is too
 * link Luzon
 * for tropical storm link Tropical cyclone
 * "13:10, just after noon "
 * when using 24-hour clock, you need to add a leading zero for morning timings, then you can dispense with "in the morning" etc
 * "along with ''her sisters Nehenta Bay and Rudyerd Bay"
 * " Captain Warrick"
 * "along Formosan and the Chinese coasts"
 * "After completing her overhaul"
 * for Japanese home islands link Japanese archipelago
 * ShipbuildingHistory.com, Hazegray.org and ww2db.com are marginally acceptable at GA, but I wouldn't be relying on them at Milhist ACR or FAC
 * ✅ Stikkyy t/c 17:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * This article is well-written, verifiable using reliable sources, covers the subject well, is neutral and stable, contains no plagiarism, and is illustrated by acceptably licensed images with appropriate captions. Passing. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)