Talk:USS Munda/GA1

Latest comment: 4 years ago by Peacemaker67 in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 07:00, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Reply


Short but interesting article. I had no idea the US built so many escort carriers. I have a few comments:

Lead
  • Instead of the first two sentences, suggest one sentence: "USS Munda (CVE-104) was the last of 50 Casablanca-class escort carriers to be built for the United States Navy during World War II." with the appropriate links of course
  • suggest "She was named after the Battle of Munda Point, which occurred on New Georgia in the Solomon Islands in 1943"
  • Drop "Built for service during World War II" as you will have already explained that with the first sentence
  • link ceremonial ship launching and ship commissioning
  • suggest "and served as an aircraft transport and replenishment carrier in the Pacific"
  • suggest "Operation Magic Carpet, the repatriation of US forces from overseas."
  • link ship breaking
  • full stop after 1960
Body
  • all dimensions in the infobox need to also be in the body, with citations. eg wl and extreme width
  • suggest putting lk=in for power to link kW in the conversion
  • state what sort of hp in the body, and perhaps pipe the link to the shp section of the hp article
  • installment→installation
  • in the Design and description section is says 27 aircraft capacity (I assume that is flight deck?), but she set sail with 71. Does a source provide a definitive maximum including the hangar deck? I suggest moving the aircraft capacity information to immediate after the catapult and elevator information as it fits better there. Also the infobox says only 27, which clearly isn't right
  • I believe 27 is for the hangar deck, as you probably need the flight deck to be clear in order to conduct operations. I haven't seen anything providing a good cap on the amount of aircraft one could conceivably fit in, and any such source would probably only exist in some sort of offline journal. If I had to guess, it would be around seventy, with possibly a couple more depending on how courageous the ship's captain happened to be.
  • for Anti-aircraft defense link Anti-aircraft warfare
  • per MOS, there should be a space between a calibre and mm, not a hyphen
  • "She was initially named after Tonowek Bay"
  • battle of Munda Point→Battle of Munda Point
  • "in the Solomon Islands, which was fought in July and August of that year."
  • link ship commissioning
  • link Shakedown cruise
  • Upon finishing, she was assigned to→She was then assigned to
  • delete "on board"
  • say Espiritu Santo was in the New Hebrides and link
  • "She then stopped at Finschhafen then Manus Island, both in the Territory of New Guinea"
  • is there any detail available on where she went during her other five runs?
  • Short of primary documents, which are probably floating around in some abandoned Navy drawer, the only real source is DANFs, which doesn't provide much clarification.
  • do we know when Rowley took over, datewise?
  • Where did she sail from on 3 July?
  • I would assume from the West Coast (doesn't make sense to single out a transit between islands), but DANFs doesn't specify.
  • should replenishment carrier be replenishment escort carrier? For consistency?
  • There weren't any replenishment fleet carriers as far as I'm aware, so both terms are synonymous for the most part.
  • say Eniwetok is in the Marshall Islands and link
  • "for longer durations of time"

More to come. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:49, 5 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

  • she was based onat Guam
  • drop the comma from "and was en route,"
  • Occupation of Japan→occupation of Japan
  • what makes ShipbuildingHistory.com and Hazegray.org reliable sources?
  • ShipbuildingHistory complements that of DANFs, in that they share the exact same dates and information. I only really use it because having all the data organized in a handy chart feels a lot more intuitive than slogging through DANFs articles.
  • Hazegray seems to be mostly the work of an "Andrew Toppan", and he's published a book and refers to himself as a "historian", but I can't find much on him. The source is mainly used in the absence of anything better, which is that of the ship being scrapped. The information provided is scarce, and I haven't seen anything that contradicts with Chesneau or DANFS. There is some curation, so it's better than nothing.