Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Japanese aircraft carrier Jun'yō

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

Article promoted by TomStar81 (talk) via MilHistBot (talk) 02:06, 19 December 2015 (UTC) « Return to A-Class review list[reply]

Japanese aircraft carrier Jun'yō edit

Nominator(s): Sturmvogel 66 (talk)

Featured article candidates/Japanese aircraft carrier Jun'yō/archive1

When the Pacific War began, the Japanese aircraft carrier Jun'yō was being converted from an ocean liner to an aircraft carrier. She was completed in time to participate in the Aleutians Campaign in June 1942 and then supported forces during the Guadalcanal Campaign later in the year. Her air group was often stripped from her during 1943 and used in defense of Rabaul and other Japanese bases, while she was used as a ferry. Torpedoed twice the following year, she was still able to participate in the Battle of the Philippine Sea. Her repairs were suspended in early 1945 as uneconomical and the Americans agreed after the Japanese surrender so she was scrapped the following year. I've recently overhauled the article after many years away and I believe that it meets the A-class standards. As always I'm looking for infelicities of language, unexplained jargon and any stray examples of BritEng that I may have missed.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:42, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments: G'day, good work as usual. A couple of nitpicks/suggestions: AustralianRupert (talk) 07:21, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"File:Image-Japanese aircraft carrier Junyo 2 cropped.jpg": suggest changing the 2010 date on this to 1945, and I don't think the uploader is the copyright holder (even if it has been cropped/retouched)
"File:Japanese aircraft carrier Junyo.jpg": source is dead and description page probably should be edited to include more details such as the date of the photograph, a description, author etc.
- Update: Apart from the issues above (which have now been fixed), the images seem to be correctly licenced to me. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 01:10, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
punctuation: "in 1944, "As a Memorial to.." --> "in 1944, as a "Memorial to..."
in the References, the Silverstone work doesn't appear to have been specifically cited. As such, I'd suggest moving it to Further reading, or citing it
the heading "Jun'yō's ship bell" could probably just be "Ship's bell" or even just "Bell" (not a big deal, though, if you don't agree)
~~" 4 in two twin mounts" --> "four in two twin mounts"?~~
"due to bad weather and an American..." --> "due to bad weather, although an American..."?
numeral presentation: "she launched 9 Zeros..." --> "she launched nine Zeros"
as above: "attacked by 8 Curtiss P-40 fighters that shot down 2 Zeros and a pair of D3As while losing 2 of their own" --> "attacked by eight Curtiss P-40 fighters that shot down two Zeros and a pair of D3As while losing two of their own"
as above: "3 more in storage, for the..." --> "three more in storage, for the..."
"Mitsubishi Heavy Industries" is overlinked
- I dropped the whole bell para as it wasn't sourced. Remember that WP:NUMNOTES requires: "Comparable quantities should be all spelled out or all in figures", which trumps the normal rule for spelling out numbers below 10.
  - G'day, yes I'm aware of that policy, and I still feel the instances highlighted above are incorrectly presented. Equally, the article is inconsistent in its approach. For instance, compare in the article "...attack the American ships, including six B5Ns, six D3As, escorted by six Zeros". AustralianRupert (talk) 09:37, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - I've only tried to be consistent within each paragraph, not article-wide, and every number for aircraft in that para is spelled out, so I'm not seeing what the issue is.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:33, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      - Ah, I see now. Ok, no worries. I think that maybe it would be best to spell them all out, for consistency sake, but it's a minor thing. I'm sure the FAC reviewers will have a better handle on it than I do. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:10, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I cleaned up the photos' copyright info and adopted most of your other suggestions. Thanks for looking this over.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:45, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting.

From now on, I'm doing the same things at A-class that I've been doing at Peer Review, and not supporting or opposing. So, here's your peer review: I've copyedited down to Armor, armament and sensors and skimmed the rest, and I don't think prose issues will be a problem at WP:FAC, if you want to take it there after you're done here. At FAC, I'll be happy to support on prose and copyedit the rest, although I may wait until you get one or two supports first.
The second paragraph uses the word "repair" a lot. - Dank (push to talk) 23:36, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Good to hear, Dan. That word is a bit too often used; I've substituted a couple of others in its place. Thanks for checking it out.

Support ~~Comments~~ This article is in good shape. I have only the following comments:

"Her aircraft were disembarked several times and used from land bases in a number of battles" - little bit awkward/repeditive
"In exchange for a 60% subsidy of her building costs by the Navy Ministry, she was designed to be converted to an aircraft carrier" - can you expand on this a bit? (perhaps also noting that this was part of a program which involved a few other ships, and that she was intended as a second/third tier warship)
Can anything be said about the transition between building the ship as a liner and finishing her as a carrier?
"Jun'yō‍ 's keel was laid down by Mitsubishi on slipway No. 3 at their shipyard in Nagasaki on 20 March 1939 as yard number 900 under the name Kashiwara Maru." - all the numbers make this a bit of a mouthful! Could it be split into two sentences? (and is the slipway number needed?)
"Most of the surviving Japanese aircraft were forced to land on the undamaged Jun'yō" - the reason for this isn't explained Nick-D (talk) 10:40, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I've dealt with all of these, I think, see how they read to you.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:11, 7 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - That looks good. I'd suggest further work against my second and third points as the article is prepared for a FAC, but the A-class criteria are met. Nick-D (talk) 10:44, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support looks solid, with very minor comments below:

"as the fast luxury passenger liner Kashiwara Maru by Nippon Yusen Kaisha (Japan Mail Steamship Company) in late 1938. " - it feels as though there should be a "the" somewhere in the second half of htis, perhaps "as the fast luxury passenger liner Kashiwara Maru by Nippon Yusen Kaisha (the Japan Mail Steamship Company) in late 1938."
"When Jun'yō first commissioned only the rangefinders were fitted " - a missing "was" after first
" Mitsubishi on slipway No. 3 at their shipyard" - is the capitalisation of "No." right here? It doesn't seem to be part of a proper name (unless it was "Slipway Number 3").
"These give her a 10°–12° list to starboard" - "gave". Hchc2009 (talk) 11:22, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for catching these and giving me an opportunity to fix them.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:24, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.