Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of the Coral Sea

The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Closed as Promoted - Cam ^(Chat) 16:26, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of the Coral Sea edit

Nominator(s): Cla68 (talk)

I believe this article about one of the arguably most significant and complex naval battles of World War II is ready for consideration for A-class status. Thank you (in no particular order) to Nick-D, Trekphiler, GoldDragon, Maralia, and Jehochman for significant assistance in expanding and polishing the article. Cla68 (talk) 02:00, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I feel that this article meets the A-class criteria. (Although Cla68 mentions me above, my contributions to the article were limited to copyediting.) Maralia (talk) 02:48, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Excellent article with no major prose issues. – Joe N 01:24, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support This is an outstanding article. I do have some comments you might want to consider though:
- It's a bit inaccurate to say that 'other nations, including the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand joined the United States as Allies in the war against Japan' after Pearl Harbor - the Commonwealth countries and the Dutch entered the war because Japan attacked Malaya and the NEI, not because of Pearl Harbor (the landing at Malaya was before the first bombs started to fall on Pearl), and cooperation between these countries and the US had been planned in some detail before the war started.
- The 'Imperial Japanese expansion' section should make some reference to the Proposed Japanese invasion of Australia, as the debate over this led to the adoption of Operation FS as a compromise position between both the various factions of the Navy and the Navy and Army.
- The See also section could be integrated into the article
- There seems to be some over-linking (eg Combined Fleet is linked a few times) Nick-D (talk) 08:35, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Changed as suggested. I noted the proposed invasion of Australia in footnote #9 and was planning on expanding on that in the Operation MO article, but I went ahead and added mention of it in this article. I'll work on incorporating the See also section over time as well as the redundant links. Thank you for the feedback. Cla68 (talk) 21:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support Outstanding read. I linked the CXAM term to our article on the CXAM radar, but otherwise have no further suggestions for improvement. TomStar81 (Talk) 12:45, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.