Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Allied naval bombardments of Japan during World War II


 * 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 MisterBee1966 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 09:06, 3 March 2016 (UTC) &laquo; Return to A-Class review list

Allied naval bombardments of Japan during World War II

 * Nominator(s): Nick-D (talk)

I've been working on this article on and off for the last five years. It covers the little-known, but fairly significant, series of bombardments on Japanese cities conducted by US, British and New Zealand warships during the last weeks of World War II. While the attacks didn't achieve the goal of provoking a Japanese response (which the Allies were confident of being able to defeat), they did damage some significant industrial facilities. The urban areas of several of the targeted cities were also damaged, resulting in hundreds of deaths. The ability of the Allied forces to sail within sight of the Japanese coastline and bombard targets at will also convinced many Japanese that the war was lost.

The article was a DYK back in 2011 and passed a GA review last February. It's since been expanded and copy edited, and I'm hopeful that it meets the A-class criteria. Thanks in advance for your comments. Nick-D (talk) 06:02, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Support Comment: G'day, Nick, fascinating topic. Just a quick one from me at this stage, but I will try to come back this weekend. AustralianRupert (talk) 10:41, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "Turner 1997, p. 224" appears as a short citation, but not a long citation. Also, it appears to use a different format to the others. AustralianRupert (talk) 10:41, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for spotting this - it looks like a drive-by addition of some sort. As I have no idea what this reference is and the detail seems unimportant, I've removed it. Nick-D (talk) 10:44, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * inconsistent caps: "the home islands..." v. "Japanese Home Islands"; AustralianRupert (talk) 20:32, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Standardised to lower case Nick-D (talk) 22:48, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "...command of Gene Fluckey..." --> do we know Fluckey's rank?
 * Commander Nick-D (talk) 22:48, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * word order: "On 20 June USS Barb commenced a patrol off Japan's northern islands under the command of Gene Fluckey fitted with an experimental 5-inch rocket launcher intended for shore bombardments. Shortly after midnight on 22 June..." Perhaps might be smoother as: " On 20 June USS Barb, under the command of Gene Fluckey, commenced a patrol off Japan's northern islands. Fitted with an experimental 5-inch rocket launcher intended for shore bombardments, shortly after midnight on 22 June..."
 * Tweaked - this wording was bugging me as well Nick-D (talk) 22:48, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * "...Allied naval aircraft, however..." --> "however" is probably unnecessary here, or potentially might be better placed elsewhere rather than at the end of the sentence;
 * Fixed Nick-D (talk) 22:48, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * " were bombarded was reported to have increased.[50] The appearance of Allied warships just off the coast also convinced many Japanese that the war had been lost..." --> This might be smoother as: "...were bombarded was reported to have increased.[50] Nevertheless, the appearance of Allied warships just off the coast convinced many Japanese that the war had been lost..." ?
 * That's an improvement (and I've tweaked the first sentence as well). Nick-D (talk) 22:48, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Images are appropriately licensed, but I'd suggest scaling up the map. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:22, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Nikki, done Nick-D (talk) 02:30, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments: As always, feel free to revert.
 * "802 16 in": probably a MOS violation, though it's not a MOS rule I'm a fan of.
 * I'll have a think about how to re-phrase this, but it's probably unavoidable. Nick-D (talk) 07:15, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Consistency: first "ironworks" is treated as singular, then: "Allied aircraft photographed the ironworks following the attack, but photo interpreters underestimated the extent to which they had been damaged", then: "the ironwork's".
 * Fixed Nick-D (talk) 07:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Recently, I've been doing the same things at A-class that I've been doing at Peer Review, and not supporting or opposing. I've copyedited the first two sections and skimmed the rest, and I don't think prose issues will be a problem at WP:FAC. If you take the article there, I'll be happy to support on prose and copyedit the rest (eventually). - Dank (push to talk) 19:35, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Dank. I am considering taking this to FAC. Nick-D (talk) 07:10, 24 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Support great work, Nick. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:52, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks Ed Nick-D (talk) 07:10, 26 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Support - some minor points / suggestions / nitpicks:
 * The second two paras in the "Background" section both use a fairly similar construction to start ("By mid-1945" and "In mid-1945") which seems a little repetitive. You might consider rewording slightly (this is a very minor point though and there would be no harm leaving it as it is in my opinion).
 * Tweaked a bit Nick-D (talk) 07:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * There is a minor inconsistency in the ref section, in one place you write "Annapolis" in others "Annapolis, Maryland"
 * Fixed Nick-D (talk) 07:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Some inconsistency with "HMSO" vs "Her Majesty's Stationery Office"
 * From memory, that's the formulation the sources use (I think that "Her Majesty's Stationery Office" decided to call itself HMSO at some point), but I'll double check Nick-D (talk) 07:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I imagine some of the authors in the references list might be notable so you might consider wikilinking them where they have an article (for instance Stephen Roskill) (suggestion only not at all req'd for A class of cse)
 * Done Nick-D (talk) 07:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I made a few minor edits to the references section (added a wikilink and an OCLC)
 * Otherwise this looks in fine shape to me. Anotherclown (talk) 23:28, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your review Nick-D (talk) 07:22, 1 March 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.