Talk:Battle of Goodenough Island/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: AustralianRupert (talk · contribs) 05:58, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status. AustralianRupert (talk) 05:58, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

no dabs found by the tools;
external links all work;
images lack alt text. It is not a GA requirement, but you might consider adding it in;
spot checks revealed no copyright violations (I checked McCarthy, Tanaka and Dexter).

I made a number of edits, please check that you are happy with these and adjust if necessary;
"On 7 August five Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) P-40 Kittyhawks of No. 76 Squadron made forced landings". The link here for No. 76 Squadron seems to go to No. 75 Squadron. Is this correct?
in the Aftermath, "Over the next two days Japanese bombers attacked..." Over which days? I think you mean the next two days after the 4 March 1943, but because the sentence is separated from the date by another two sentences, it is a little unclear. I wonder if it can be reworded/reworked slightly to make it clearer.

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

in the Aftermath, this "The 2/12th Infantry Battalion remained on the island until the end of December..." is followed by "the small Australian occupation force used". Who provided this small occupation force once the 2/12th had gone? Do the sources say?
in the Aftermath, I didn't quite get the the reason for this: "The plans to develop Goodenough Island had to be postponed." Was it because of the need for resources around Buna? If so, I wonder if it could be made clearer with a brief clause or sentence in that paragraph.

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
a (tagged and captioned): b (Is illustrated with appropriate images): c (non-free images have fair use rationales): d public domain pictures appropriately demonstrate why they are public domain:

Overall, I believe that this meets the Good Article criteria and has the potential to one day be a Featured Article; there are just a couple of minor points that I think need tweaking/clarifying before it can be promoted. I'm happy to discuss anything you disagree with in my review, but as I said I will be offline next week until Saturday 24 March. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:49, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]