Talk:Indian Ocean raid (1944)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk · contribs) 21:45, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status and should have the full review up soon. Dana boomer (talk) 21:45, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Background, "Japanese Combined Fleet withdrew from its base at Truk in the Central Pacific and was divided". "Withdrew from" is an action that the JCF took, "was divided" is something that was done to it - should be consistent.

Fixed

Background, "all prisoners other than radio operators" Why were radio operators spared? (I'm assuming it has something to do with using them to break codes or send out false messages, but we may want to make this more clear...or I could be completely wrong!)

They were to be interrogated for useful information - I've clarified this

Raid, "through the Sunda Strait on March." I think we have part of a date missing here...

Fixed

Aftermath - Do we know what happened to the survivors who were sent to the work camps?

Amazingly enough, they all seem to have survived the war - I'd added this.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Do we know when the photographer of File:Aoba Catapult Trial.jpg died? The tag that is used on the image specifies public domain "50 years after the death of the creator" - but it is quite possible that the creator of an image taken in 1938 was still alive in 1961.

I've replaced the photo with a US Navy image
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Overall very nice. A few prose niggles and one image question; once these are resolved I think the article should be good to go for GA status. Dana boomer (talk) 22:03, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your review. I think that all your comments are now addressed. Nick-D (talk) 22:51, 28 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, everything looks good, so I'm now passing the article to GA status. Thank you for the prompt responses! Dana boomer (talk) 00:23, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]