Talk:Japanese battleship Musashi/GA1

GA Review

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

1. Well-written:

• Lead needs to be expanded to two paragraphs per WP:LEAD

Done. Cam ^(Chat) 23:25, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• 'With each vessel of the Yamato class displacing well over 70,000 tons, it was hoped that the firepower of Musashi and her sister-ships could offset American industrial power' - Repeated use of 'Musashi and her sister-ships', please rephrase
• 'The keel of Musashi was laid down 29 March 1938 at Mitsubishi's Nagasaki shipyard, designated "Battleship No. 2"' - Unless the shipyard was designated that, it needs 'and was designated' before the name

Fixed. Cam ^(Chat) 19:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• Should the launching date and the commissioning date be swapped to give the article a stable timeline? It's a tad confusing otherwise.
• 'Fifteen days later, acting on codes deciphered by Ultra, Yamamoto was killed while en-route from New Britain to Ballale.' - who was acting on codes?

fixed. American fighter squadrons. Cam ^(Chat) 19:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• 'Transferring to Kure on 1 July 1943, Musashi drydocked the same day' - For us non-naval experts, can it be expanded upon what this means?
• 'The remainder of 1943 was spent in Truk Lagoon, with Captain Asakura Bunji assuming command of Musashi on 7 December 1943' - What happened to the other CO?

Fixed. Cam ^(Chat) 23:25, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• 'when she undocked on 22 April, Musashi's secondary battery was composed of six 6.1-inch guns, 12 5-inch guns, one hundred-thirty 25-mm guns, and four 13-mm machine-guns' - Capitalize first word

Fixed. Cam ^(Chat) 23:25, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• 'the counterattack planned for the American landings at Leyte.' - 'planned against the American landings at Leyte' sounds better

fixed. Cam ^(Chat) 19:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• 'On 24 October 1944, Kurita's centre force came under heavy air-attack by five separate strikes of American carrier task forces' - 'from' not 'of American carrier task forces'

Fixed. Cam ^(Chat) 22:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• 'Early in the assaults, American carrier pilots learned to capitalize on Musashi's structural weaknesses near the bow, heavily damaging the battleship in the first three raids' - What structural weaknesses? And can we expand at all on these attacks - when did they happen, for example, what aircraft were involved? Did the ship knock down any of her attackers?

Fixed. Cam ^(Chat) 22:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• 'Musashi sank at 19:36,[4] having taken some seventeen bomb and nineteen torpedoes hits.[17] 1,023 of her 2,399-man crew died in the sinking' - Okay, this needs a slight rewrite, it isn't really clear from the previous sentence that she took enough damage to sink. And again, was it the cumulative effect of the raids that did the ship in? Or one single hit, for example? Also, the last part: the crew numbers should really be mentioned at the start of the article as well, if you have them for when she was launched, and 'the sinking' doesn't sound right; 'when she sank' is better.

I will clarify this. It was just the cumulative effect of continual attacks and hits - the fact that it took 36 hits to sink her demonstrates her sheer protection capabilities. Cam ^(Chat) 19:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

1. Factually accurate and verifiable:

• 'Because of the vessel's size, the Nagasaki dockyards and construction equipment had to be heavily modified to fit Musashi's hull' - Not really a criticism, but do we have any further info on what these modifications were? I won't oppose on this, btw.

done. Cam ^(Chat) 22:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• What was the ship named after?

It already mentions that in the lead. Cam ^(Chat) 22:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

1. Broad in its coverage:

• Now, I'm no expert in naval articles, but shouldn't this article have stuff on the ship's armaments, armour and other things like that? Is there any reason it doesn't? It just seems to me that the article is a tad bare-bones. But of course I'm not familiar with naval sources; is this all the information available on the ship?

My general plan was to put the majority of that information in the flagship article (Yamato class battleship). I had a blurb in Yamato's article which I've slightly modified and transferred to this article. Cam ^(Chat) 22:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• 'Musashi lead a large fleet under Admiral Koga' - Wikilnik this Admiral if possible?

Fixed. Cam ^(Chat) 22:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• 'Almost immediately after leaving Palau, Musashi and her escorts were attacked by the TunnyTemplate:WP Ships USS instances, which fired six torpedoes at the battleship' - Can we fully wikilink Tunny, as it's not very clear what it is.

Fixed. Cam ^(Chat) 22:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• One of your refs is missing a page number - please add it.

fixed. Cam ^(Chat) 23:25, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

• What makes that website a Reliable Site? And if it is, why isn't the info about the survivors being rescued and transferred to other areas been included?

See this. Cam ^(Chat) 22:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

1. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.

• Passes

1. Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

• Passes

1. Illustrated, if possible, by images

• Passes

This is a good article, but I feel the issues highlighted above need addressing before I can pass it as a Good Article. Skinny87 (talk) 14:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm more than satisfied with these changes; I'll pass it as a Good Article now. Well done! Skinny87 (talk) 07:33, 26 January 2009 (UTC)