Talk:New Guinea Air Warning Wireless/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: AustralianRupert (talk · contribs) 09:27, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

G'day, I will review this against the GA criteria. It may be a few days, though. Maybe even the weekend. Sorry. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:27, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Comments/suggestions

AustralianRupert (talk) 09:39, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

• The first sentence of the lead uses the name “New Guinea Air Warning Wireless Company”, but this doesn’t reflect the name of the article
  • There was some discussion here about this but it didn't really ever really determine what the common name was. Whilst I favoured "New Guinea Air Warning Wireless Company" as being more complete I have to acknowledge that there is considerable evidence to show that "New Guinea Air Warning Wireless" was used widely used, whilst other variations such as "New Guinea Air Warning Wireless Unit" also appear in the official history. As such the discussion sort of petered out there as the current name didn't seem very obviously wrong I guess. Thoughts? Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
    • G'day, my only concern really is that the article name doesn't match that which appears in the infobox or the first sentence of the article. Any variation would be fine, IMO, given that the sources disagree, but the key elements should be in agreement. Perhaps you could just include some of the alternative names in the lead sentence, e.g. drop the "Company" from the bolded text, and then say also known as "...Company, NGAWW or the "Spotters"..."
      • Ack - I've changed this now [1]. Does that work? Anotherclown (talk) 11:35, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
        • Yes, that works for me. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
• watch out for irregular capitalization of common nouns, for instance "Independent Companies (later Commando Companies)" should be lower case
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• Some of the further reading entries probably should be in Ext links
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• Note 3 probably should be moved to the end of the sentence and could probably be merged with Note 4
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• " In the first month of operations 16 stations were subsequently established...": remove the word "subsequently" as it isn't necessary
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "formed in January 1942 in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea...": suggest changing Papua New Guinea to Territory of Papua...it probably also needs a paired comma
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "were responsible for the first Japanese killed in Papua by Australian ground forces"...this seems a little awkward...and perhaps a little gauche...is there a better way of saying this?
  • Agreed. I've changed it to focus more on the operations of the unit itself. Does this work [2]? Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "Commendations Cards were..." --> "Commendation Cards were"?
  • Sorry there was a typo, it should be "Commendation Card" - see [3]. Unsure of exactly what level award they were but I imagine they must have been something like a CDF's Commendation. They were not all that common it seems with only 357 awarded according to one source [4]. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "volunteers primarily from the 39th Infantry Battalion..." maybe some context could be added here about who the 39th were? i.e. a Militia infantry battalion sent to hastily garrison Port Moresby following Japan's entry into the war
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "Japanese air raids around Port Moresby" move the link to Port Moresby from here to first mention
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "Other tasks including the long-range transmission..." --> "Other tasks included the long-range transmission..."
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• " with little signals training using...." --> " with some experience using..."?
  • I tweaked this a little. Pls let me know if it needs further changes. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "the out perimeter was..." --> "the outer perimeter was"
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "In March the spotters was responsible " --> "were responsible"
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "coverage following in response to the crises..." --> is the word "following" necessary here (you have already used it in the sentence)
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "volunteers from army units" --> should "army" be capitalized here?
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "and of course their radio, often..." --> remove "of course"
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• " in order to continue to operate..." --> " in order to continue operating"
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "Later, as the tide of war turned" --> "Later, as the tide of war turned in the Allies' favour..."
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "continued the future of...": add a comma between "continued" and "the"...I think
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "from the US Signal Corps were seconded" ---> add a comma after "Corps"
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• " the Australian military decided that it would not agree to American requests" --> do the sources say why? I assume maybe that it had to do with Militia not being deployed outside certain territory?
  • I don't recall seeing it mentioned in the sources when I had them (unfortunately I had to return them). I don't think it was due to the Militia restriction as it was an AIF unit. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
    • Hmm, curious... the unit was formed from Militiamen at the start, though; I assume they volunteered for the AIF, then. No dramas if the sources don't say. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:10, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "the unit lost 8 men" --> "the unit lost eight men"
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
• "The role of long range clandestine communications..." --> "Within the Australian Army, the role of long range clandestine communications..."
  • Done. Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
    • Thanks for taking the time to review the article, I've actioned most of these points (or responded above). Anotherclown (talk) 09:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
      • No worries, good work. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:08, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Criteria

• It is reasonably well written.

  a (prose): b (MoS):

• 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.

  a (fair representation): b (all significant views):

• It is stable.

  No edit wars etc.:

• 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:

  a Pass/Fail: