Talk:Japanese cruiser Asama/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Parsecboy (talk · contribs) 16:30, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Several dupe links to be fixed

   Check ENGVAR - see a defence and defense

   "The Russians were unaware that war had begun that night when the IJN launched a surprise attack on Port Arthur until notified by the Japanese that morning." - this is pretty awkwardly worded.

   ..." including Vice Admiral Stepan Makarov's flagship, the battleship Petropavlovsk, and Asama engaged the Russian cruisers before falling back on Tōgō's battleships." - this almost makes it sound like Asama was part of the Russian fleet - I'd probably split it after mentioning Petropavlovsk.

   {xt|"the two ships sailed departed..."}} - seems like there's an extra word here.

   Can we get some context on the American Expeditionary Squadron? I assume this is a Japanese formation - maybe something could be added in a note?

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

   File:Asama-cruiser.jpg - needs the Japanese/US copyright tags instead of the pd-old one

   File:Japanese cruiser Asama 1946.jpg - this could be tricky, since it doesn't meet the second condition of the copyright template (it was obviously not taken before 1946) - we'd need a pre-1956 date of publication, I think.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

You've got eagle eyes, my friend! Reworded everything, see how they work for you. Not sure what to add about the American Expeditionary Squadron as it seems to have been a temporary formation to protect shipping along the west coast of the Americas. I'm not sure of its exact name, nor when it was formed or disbanded, so I'm a little reluctant to add a link, and its activities discussed in the next couple of sentences. But if you think something more is needed, can you be a bit more specific? Thanks again for the thorough review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:35, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

After having read through Izumo, I see what it was - maybe just add a note explaining that it was an Anglo-Japanese formation and maybe include the ships that were assigned to it. Parsecboy (talk) 17:42, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Added a note. Didn't bother with composition on first mention as the squadron flagship, Izumo, is mentioned as such after the wreck. But I can change that if you think that it would be clearer.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:42, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Parsecboy (talk) 16:29, 11 May 2015 (UTC)