Talk:Singapore strategy/GA1

Latest comment: 13 years ago by Ian Rose in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

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

Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk) 12:31, 9 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Well, since I was thinking of writing this article, I may as well review it now you've saved me the trouble... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:31, 9 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Technical review

  • The following dab links need attention:
    • Fighter
    • Malaya
    • William Benson
    • William Leahy
  • External links okay
  • Images appear appropriately licensed but no alt text present (not an actual requirement but something to consider if taking the article further)

Content review

  • Plans: ...for political reasons, the naval planners were overridden by the politicians and the battleship HMS Prince of Wales and the battlecruiser HMS Repulse were sent to Singapore -- Two things with this statement: 1) actual and thematic repetition re. "political" and "politicians" -- I think it's a given that politicians do things for political reasons; 2) if you're going to say it's political, reckon you need to extrapolate a bit -- how or why was it political, e.g. because it was popular and/or cheap, or the alternative was unpopular and/or expensive, or whatever.
  • Criticism: ...he argued that if war was most likely to break out in the Pacific at a time when the United Kingdom was involved in a crisis in Europe that would prevent it from sending sufficient resources to Singapore -- This is a bit of a mouthful (though perhaps not beyond one sentence); can you double-check it's what you want to express because I think it can be interpreted more than one way as it stands.
  • In retrospect: Many historians felt that the Singapore strategy was unrealistic all along... -- Can I just double-check that your cited source implies that "many historians" felt this?
    • Hmmm...
  • Well, that looks like "many historians" to me... ;-) No seriously, it's just that it's the sort of phrase people pick up on at FAC and you might need to defend it. I have no prob with you using it here given what the source says. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:54, 17 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Summary