Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Operation Transom/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 10 October 2021 [1].

Operation Transom edit

Nominator(s): Nick-D (talk) 05:19, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Transom was one of the most diverse military operations of World War II. Undertaken in mid-May 1944, it involved a fleet made up of ships from six Allied nations (including a British and an American aircraft carrier) that sailed from Ceylon, refuelled in Australia and attacked a city in the Japanese-occupied Netherlands East Indies. The sources are oddly divergent over whether the raid was a success, but all agree that it provided the British with useful exposure to superior American carrier tactics.

I developed this article to GA standard in August 2020, and it passed a Military History Wikiproject A-class review last month. It has since been further expanded and improved, and I am hopeful that the FA criteria are met. Thank you in advance for your comments. Nick-D (talk) 05:19, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review edit

Pass. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:25, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggest scaling up the map not using fixed px size
  • File:Carrier_strike_on_Surabaya,_Java_in_May_1944.jpg: source link is dead. Ditto File:HMS_Illustrious_(87)_steams_past_USS_Saratoga_(CV-3)_in_the_Indian_Ocean_on_18_May_1944_(NNAM.1977.031.085.012).jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:31, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've updated the link for the first image, and replaced the second as the source database is dead. @Nikkimaria: thanks a lot for these comments. Nick-D (talk) 10:37, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Hawkeye7 edit

  • I reviewed this article at A-class and support its promotion to Featured. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:28, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Moisejp edit

I've read through twice and made several minor edits. The prose is excellent and (although I don't know much about the subject) it seems very comprehensive. I support the article's promotion. Moisejp (talk) 02:57, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by PM edit

As usual, little to nitpick about here. A few suggestions:

  • "Land-based American heavy bombers struck Surabaya that night and Australian aircraft laid mines in nearby waters." sort of begs the question of where the Australian aircraft came from.
    • Northern Australia - tweaked Nick-D (talk) 05:15, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "small British-led Eastern Fleet which was led" could you vary the "led...led"?
  • in this context should British Government→British government?
  • Dutch East Indies→NEI (as previously defined)
  • "Australian aircraft also laid mines" which squadron and where did they fly from?
    • Nos. 11 and 43 Squadrons and Yampi Sound in Western Australia - added Nick-D (talk) 05:15, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • should it be "the official historian of the Royal Navy's role in World War II, Stephen Roskill,..."?
  • ditto "The official historian of the overall British effort in South East Asia, Stanley Woodburn Kirby,..."

That's it. Nice work. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:09, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done. Version reviewed

Pass. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:48, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The coordinates given in the infobox seem very specific. What's the source for those?
    • They point to the docks at Surabaya, which were the main target of the operation. Nick-D (talk) 05:38, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • ranges should use dashes, even in titles
  • Brown: should publisher be Frontline Books? Nikkimaria (talk) 20:25, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fixed - I had the US publisher for some reason, despite my copy being the UK edition (due to over-reliance on the auto-fill tool in the citation template, I suspect). Thank you for this review. Nick-D (talk) 05:38, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Z1720 edit

Non-expert prose review.

  • "on the city's port and the naval base there." Delete "there", as I don't think it's necessary, as the sentence already describes that the naval base is in the city.
  • "The Wonokromo oil refinery located in the city" wikilink to Wonokromo?
  • "The reinforcements which were scheduled to arrive over the next four months would comprise 146 warships." -> "The reinforcements, which were scheduled to arrive over the next four months, would comprise 146 warships." or "The reinforcements scheduled to arrive over the next four months would comprise 146 warships."
    • I've reworked this sentence Nick-D (talk) 10:54, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I checked the infobox to ensure the information is in the article and found no concerns.
    • That's always a good thing to check! Nick-D (talk) 10:54, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Those are my comments, a well-written article otherwise. Please ping when the above are responded to. Z1720 (talk) 23:46, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Z1720: thank you for this review. I think that I may have addressed your comments. Nick-D (talk) 10:54, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • My comments have been addressed. I support. Z1720 (talk) 15:09, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - pass edit

Recusing to review.

  • The sources used all appear to me to be reliable. I am unable to find any other sources which would materially add to the content of the article. The sources referred to seem to support the text cited, insofar as I have checked them. I found no unattributed close paraphrasing. I consider the sources to be current, as these things go. A reasonable mix of perspectives are represented. Everything that I would expect to be cited, is. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:21, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by JennyOz edit

Hi Nick, as a non-milhist'n I found this easy to understand. I have just a few mos-type suggestions...

  • and that the Indian Ocean would be a subsidiary theatre - move wlink to first mention (first sentence in para above)
  • a water distilling ship and - is wlink intentional ie not to distilling ship?
    • I didn't know we had an article on that topic! Linked. Nick-D (talk) 05:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • kept them at least 600 miles (970 km) from Japanese airfields - why? is that an out of range thing?
    • Yes, that's right. I've added this. Nick-D (talk) 05:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • times (6:30 am, 7:20 am, 8:30 am, 10:50 am, 3:00 pm) - add nbspaces per mos
  • flying off point - add hyphen?
    • Searching Google Books indicates that British English works don't have a hyphen here. Nick-D (talk) 05:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • reached Bremerton, Washington on 10 June - geocomma after Washington
  • and ... severe destruction -nbsp ellipsis
  • a 1990 work by Edywn Gray - typo Edwyn, plus add wlink and authorlink
  • photo reconnaissance aircraft - hyphen?
  • Illustrious's usual air wing v Illustrious' crew farewelling - consistent possessive
  • from the Allied landing on Wakde island v the Allied landing at Wakde Island off - consistent cap on island
  • categories - none for Ops involving US?

Thanks, JennyOz (talk) 01:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Operation_Transom/archive1&oldid=1049192809"