Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Naval Battle of Guadalcanal

Naval Battle of Guadalcanal
I would like to nominate the article for a "Good" article designation and, if successful, eventually as a "featured" article. But first I'm requesting a peer review to help the article be as good as possible before nominating for those categories. Thank-you in advance for your inputs and suggestions. Cla68 17:44, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Kirill Lokshin
A nice article, but still some work to be done: Otherwise, this looks to be a well-written piece! Kirill Lok s h in 01:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Inline citations are a must; this is especially needed for subjective or speculative material (e.g. "Abe appeared to lose his nerve"), but can be used liberally throughout the article.
 * There are a lot of single-sentence paragraphs that should be merged into less choppy prose.
 * The "Aftermath" section is far too short to stand on its own. If there's not enough material, it should be removed entirely; but I suspect there's more that can be added here.
 * Ideally, some of the red-links should be eliminated—particularly those for individual ships—but this is only an issue that might come up during a featured article nomination.


 * Thank you for the constructive inputs. Is it ok to use non-linked citations like:  "Abe appeared to lose his nerve (Morrison, 1958)"?  Or should the citations be the "" style? Cla68 13:20, 11 April 2006 (UTC)


 * The preference on FAC is to use the new cite.php style, but I think either of the other styles would probably be acceptable as well. Kirill Lok s h in 13:17, 11 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I understand now how to do the new cite style and I'm going to do that to the article as soon as I get a chance and have all the reference information I need. The short paragraphs have been combined and the "Aftermath" section has been expanded.  I'll also take out some of the red-links.  If no objection, I'll archive this peer review.  I'll plan on nominating this article for "good" status once I've corrected the citation/reference issue.  Thanks again for the help. Cla68 12:50, 27 April 2006 (UTC)