Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Air raids on Japan

Air raids on Japan
I've recently greatly expanded this article from this stub to its current status and would like some feedback on how to improve it further - I hope to develop the article to A class and possibly even FA status. I'd greatly appreciate all comments, though I guess I'm particularly interested in comments on the structure of the article (does the combination of chronological and thematic approaches make sense?), level of detail (excessive or OK?) and balance (I think more needs to be added on the Japanese experience of these attacks, but how much and what are some additional sources which can be drawn on?). If you'd like to jump in and change the article that would, of course, also be great.

Please note that I'm yet to give the article a comprehensive read through or copy edit and there's a list of things I and others have identified as still needing work at Talk:Air raids on Japan, so this should be considered a draft-type article. Thanks, Nick-D (talk) 10:35, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Fifelfoo

 * I note with pleasure the items listed at the Talk: page for improvement and concur.
 * The notes are well formatted at this stage; I've not done a minute note proof read as the article is still in development
 * The quality of the bibliography is high, both in formatting and source selection. These are primarily improvement notes:
 * ISBNs for all items as available
 * When short citing entries in an encyclopaedia, the title of the entry may be relevant to the short cite. If separately authored, list the authors for the chapter.
 * Good point.
 * Double check DOIs before going A or FAC class, bot provided DOIs may point incorrectly
 * The DOIs are from the PDFs of the articles themselves, so should be OK
 * Oops: (1st ed. ed.).
 * Fixed - and well spotted. Nick-D (talk) 07:53, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Intothatdarkness
That's about it. Well sourced and written on the whole.Intothatdarkness (talk) 18:27, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The first paragraph under "United States Preparations" might read better if it said "...began contingency planning for an air campaign against Japan" instead of its current form. The second paragraph might also read better if this "proved reluctant to allow the aircraft territory under his control" was changed to something like "proved reluctant to allow the aircraft to operate from bases under his control."
 * Pre-war Japanese Defenses - delete the ", however" from the end of the second sentence.
 * Operation Matterhorn, Preparations - "The Japanese Government stepped-up its civil defenses from the northern autumn of 1943." should perhaps read "early autumn" or "late autumn." If "northern autumn" is a specific event, it should be defined.
 * My understanding is that when seasons are mentioned, the relevant hemisphere should always be specified to prevent confusion
 * Initial Attacks from the Mariana Islands - consider changing "which would allow B-29s" in the third sentence to "allowing B-29s" (it reads better IMO that way).
 * Not sure if a capsule history of the atomic weapons program is needed here.
 * It's about the same length as the background provided for the other major forms of attack and this topic is normally covered in accounts of the bombing campaign on Japan, so I'm leaning towards leaving this as is.
 * Belated thanks for your comments. Except where noted above, I've incorporated them Nick-D (talk) 11:52, 4 April 2011 (UTC)