Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū


 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article promoted Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:20, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū

 * Nominator(s): Sturmvogel 66 (talk)

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because I believe that it meets the criteria.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:19, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Just some comments, not a complete review: - Dank (push to talk)
 * "and did encroach": and encroached
 * "Nine transverse arrestor wires were installed on the flight deck and could stop a 13,000 lb (6,000 kg) aircraft.": Nine transverse arrestor wires that could stop a 13,000 lb (6,000 kg) aircraft were installed on the flight deck.
 * "Two of triple mounts": Two of the triple mounts
 * "Second Carrier Division,Brown": ?
 * "Sōryū and the other five carriers, launched two waves": no comma
 * "the defenders of Wake Island which": the defenders of Wake Island, who
 * "The four carriers launched an airstrike of 180 aircraft against Tjilatjep on 5 March, sinking five small ships, damaging an additional nine badly enough that they had to be scuttled, and set the town on fire": I take it "set" is parallel to "launched", but they're too far apart for readers to easily parse this.
 * "Hiryū contributed 18 B3Ns and nine Zeros to the force, the latter encountered a flight of six Fairey Swordfish torpedo bombers from 788 Naval Air Squadron en route, shooting them all down without loss.": Something's missing ... maybe "and".
 * "Hawker Hurricane fighters from 30 and 258 Squadrons RAF": one option is: ... Nos. 30 and 258 Squadrons RAF
 * "to bring the aircraft up to the flight deck, warm up and launch the strike group": nonparallel. It needs: "... and to warm up ..."
 * "they executed a fruitless glide bombing attack on Hiryū in return the gunner": ?
 * "Yamaguchi radioed Nagumo at 16:30 his intention": Yamaguchi radioed his intention to Nagumo at 16:30
 * " One torpedo missed and the other struck near the bow without the typical plume of water, the detonation was quite visible.": Maybe: ..., although the detonation ... - Dank (push to talk) 12:30, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * All done, thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:22, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Support Comments: just a few nitpicks from me:
 * "draught" (infobox) v "draft" (body of article);
 * "Flight Deck and Hangars" --> "Flight deck and hangars"?
 * the duplicate link checker tool identifies the following as potentially overlinked: "Hull (watercraft)"; "Flight deck", "Japanese aircraft carrier Akagi", "Cruiser", "Combined Fleet", "Midway Atoll", "United States Army Air Corps", "Magazine (artillery)", "Japanese battleship Haruna", "VT-8", "USS Enterprise (CV-6)",
 * is it possible to get the Japanese on the image description page for "File:Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryu 1939.jpg" translated into English? (Some of it is, but some isn't at the moment.) Please note, if this is not possible, it is not a warstoper for me. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:07, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Nitpicks dealt with. The description was simply Hiryu in Yokosuka after completion in 1939. I've added it to the image's page on Commons. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:22, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
 * G'day, I've made a couple of tweaks and have a few more comments (otherwise it looks good to me): AustralianRupert (talk) 10:09, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * "On 26 April, the five carriers of the First Air Fleet departed from Staring Bay..." This date doesn't seem right, given that later you mention "4 April". Do you mean 26 March?
 * Good catch.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 06:09, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * "force the US Navy into a showdown to eliminate the American carrier threat. He decided to invade and occupy Midway Atoll, which he was sure would draw out the American carrier forces to battle..." (the last part seems redundant, perhaps you could just say this: "force the US Navy into a showdown to eliminate the American carrier threat. He decided to invade and occupy Midway Atoll.)"
 * I'm not sure that I agree. Yamamoto wanted to get rid of the US carriers; Midway was the bait that would draw them out. I think that both sentences are needed to express that although I've tweaked it a bit.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 06:09, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, it's not a war stoper for me. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:49, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * this sentence might be better if it was moved to an earlier part of the paragraph: "Unknown to the Japanese, the US Navy had divined the Japanese MI plan from signals intelligence and had prepared an ambush using its three available carriers, positioned northeast of Midway". (Perhaps it might be smoother if it appeared before "The air group suffered..."
 * Moved it into the first para and reworked the first two paras. How do they read?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 06:09, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Looks good. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:49, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * "At 07:15 Admiral Nagumo ordered " --> "At 07:15 Nagumo ordered"?
 * This Wiki policy conflicts with everything I'm used in referring to military men.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 06:09, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Agreed. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:49, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * repetition (knocked & knocked): "that knocked three boilers off-line and knocked out all electrical power" --> "that damaged three boilers and knocked out all electrical power"?
 * Agreed.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 06:09, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * "remained on board as Hiryū was torpedoed at 05:10 by Makigumo..." perhaps it could be made clearer here that this was done deliberately to scuttle the ship? Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:09, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 06:09, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No worries, good luck with taking the article further. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:49, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Comments
 * I'll review this more next week
 * The top heavy and structurally weak links to other articles probably should mention those articles and add citations.
 * Rewritten more explicitly; the cite to Chesneau suffices, I think.
 * I thought when we had a one ship class we mentioned it as 'unique' in the British carrier series?
 * I've never used that terminology, but others may have or might have added it to my singleton articles like HMS Argus. I've added a phrase that she was the only ship of her class to the lede.
 * I don't know anything about Japanese ship naming but my guess is that isn't a traditional name, means something other than the literal meaning and was chosen for a reason so the namesake probably should be cited.Kirk (talk)
 * Nope, no namesake. Much like the USN of the time, the IJN had rigid naming conventions for their ships and carriers were named after flying creatures, both real and mythological. Akagi and Kaga, converted from a BC and BB, respectively, retained their traditional names upon their conversion. Look forward to your comments.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:24, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Interesting - that's what I meant & that should be in the article w/a citation. Kirk (talk) 18:31, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Done.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * 40% of the citations are from a single source (Parshall & Tully), which is probably too high unfortunately.
 * They're the single best source for the Battle of Midway.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The historian opinion about the AA guns could be cut since it doesn't seem to really come up as any kind of issue later.
 * While not explicitly mentioned, those problems might have contributed to the failure to shoot down more of the attacking American aircraft.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Sprinkle in a few more 'Admiral' and 'Captain' in the service history instead of just a surname of an officer.
 * MOS is rank only on first appearance.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * 1st Air Fleet or First Air Fleet?
 * Fixed.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems to me there's some non-flag officers who are USN personnel but their equivalents in the IJN are missing, and I assume the loss of the First Air Fleet had some notable junior/staff officers. Kirk (talk) 18:31, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The notable staff officers of the Kido Butai generally survived; the critical losses were among the aviators, carrier captains and carrier division commanders and are discussed on their individual ship articles.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Support Comments 
 * this note does not mention the other ship - you and I know it's Soryu, but most will not.
 * Good idea.
 * On that note, it might be worth mentioning in the lead that the ship was built to a modified-Soryu design.
 * Probably a good idea.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * "ship's air group was transferred at Hainan Island" - should be "transferred to"
 * Good catch.
 * Is it likely that Tomeo Kaku will get an en.wiki article? If so, it would be better to redlink his name, especially since few English-speakers can read Japanese.
 * He later made flag rank and there is a book on IJN admirals in English if anyone is actually interested in writing them up.
 * The first sentence in the Pearl Harbor section is a bit too complex, I think. According to Yamaguchi's article, he commanded the 2nd Division since 1940, so that bit can be moved earlier to cut down on this sentence.
 * Done.
 * "That battleship" - Which battleship? "That" requires an antecedent, which is not currently in the article.
 * Good catch
 * "Later that day they sank the oil tanker USS Pecos." - Who's they? The cruisers? Hiryu's aircraft? I assume the latter, but right now, it implies the former.
 * Clarified.
 * "Two days later they attacked Christmas Island and Hiryū's aircraft sank the Dutch freighter Poelau Bras before returning to Staring Bay on 11 March[18] to resupply and train for the impending Indian Ocean raid that was intended to secure newly conquered Burma, Malaya, and the Dutch East Indies against any Allied attack by destroying base facilities and forces in the eastern Indian Ocean.[31]" - this is a massive sentence; split it please.
 * Done, how does it read now?
 * Much better, thanks.
 * "the US Navy had divined the Japanese plan from signals intelligence" - might it better to be more specific and note that the USN had broken JN-25?
 * Good idea.
 * Hide the dab for Ballard
 * Done.
 * Do either of the external links actually add anything to the article? If not, toss them. Parsecboy (talk) 14:03, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:06, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * My concerns have been addressed, moving to support. Parsecboy (talk) 09:21, 24 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Comments Support
 * No dab links (no action req'd).
 * External links check out (no action req'd).
 * Images lack Alt Text so you might consider adding it (suggestion only - not an ACR requirement).
 * The Citation Check Tool reveals no issues with reference consolidation (no action req'd).
 * Images all appear to be PD/free or licensed and seem appropriate to the article (no action req'd).
 * The Earwig Tool reveal no issues with copyright violation or close paraphrasing (no action req'd).
 * No duplicate links per WP:REPEATLINK (no action req'd).
 * I'm no ship expert but have read through it to check for prose issues / any glaring mistakes and have made a couple of MOS tweaks myself.
 * Minor prose nitpick here: "...but their sustained rate of fire was around eight rounds per minute...". Use of "around" and "rounds" together sounds a little strange. Consider instead: "but their sustained rate of fire was approximately eight rounds per minute..." (suggestion only).
 * It's a good suggestion.
 * "Now the flagship of the Second Carrier Division, Hiryū, commanded by Captain Tomeo Kaku, was one of six carriers comprising the Kido Butai..." A few issues here. Firstly it seems to lack context to me. Could a sentence be added to place it in time and to explain how and why this occurred (maybe something to do with the situation in 1941 that lead to the Pearl Harbor attack etc)? Also not sure if use of the term "now" is the correct tense (given you are writing 70 odd years after the fact).
 * The "now" is used because Hiryu was the divisional flagship during Pearl Harbor, but I have no idea when that happened as none of my sources provide a date after Soryu became flagship on 26 October. Added a paragraph to better explain the context. Does this work for you?
 * "While returning to Japan, Vice Admiral Chūichi Nagumo, commander of the First Air Fleet, ordered that Sōryū and Hiryū be detached on 16 December..." I think this also needs some context. For instance: "While returning to Japan after the attack, Vice Admiral Chūichi Nagumo, commander of the First Air Fleet, ordered that Sōryū and Hiryū be detached on 16 December.."
 * Done.
 * "...who had already defeated the first Japanese attack..." which attack was this?
 * Clarified.
 * Repetitive language here: "This process was limited by the number of ordnance carts used to handle the bombs and torpedoes and the limited number of ordnance elevators." Specifically "limited" used twice. Consider: "This process was slowed by the number of ordnance carts used to handle the bombs and torpedoes and the limited number of ordnance elevators." (suggestion only)
 * Good idea. Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:09, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Otherwise this looks quite good to me. Happy to discuss any points you don't agree with. Anotherclown (talk) 08:59, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Those changes work well for me. Happy to spt. Anotherclown (talk) 02:11, 24 August 2013 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.