Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Battle of Tulagi and Gavutu-Tanambogo

Battle of Tulagi and Gavutu-Tanambogo
Respectfully request a review to see if any problems with this article that I may have missed. Cla68 10:32, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Kirill Lokshin
You're just churning these out, aren't you? Pretty soon your userpage will look like Lord Emsworth's! ;-)

Overall, the article looks to be up to your usual standards. Just a few minor points of formatting that need to be looked at: Kirill Lokshin 01:19, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The article uses "marine" uncapitalized throughout. I was under the impression that, when referring to the USMC, this should be "Marine"; is that not the case?
 * If abbreviated ranks (e.g. "Lt Col") are used, they should probably have periods; but I would just write them out, as there's little benefit to introducing potentially confusing abbreviations.
 * Footnotes in the middle of sentences (e.g. "General Vandegrift and 11,000[40] U.S. Marines") should generally be avoided.


 * Within the US, capitalizing the use of the word "marine" when referring to US Marines is the norm. However, if I understand right, the word can also be generically used to describe naval assault troops of any country or military organization.  I was afraid that if I capitalized it throughout the article, it would show a US bias.  I guess, since it's referring specifically to US Marines, it could probably be capitalized without major objection by others.  I'll write-out the rank names.  I often have citations within sentences because I like using long sentences that often contain details from more than one source.  I'll work on trying not to do that as much in the future.  Thank you for the review and helpful comments. Cla68 01:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * It's worth noting that there's nothing wrong with moving the footnote to the end of the sentence; that's the style recommended by the CMoS, in any case. If it's necessary to indicate specifically what's being cited, this can be done within the footnote itself. Kirill Lokshin 01:40, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I see. I'll do that from now on. Cla68 01:55, 25 October 2006 (UTC)