Talk:Battle of the Hongorai River/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Anotherclown (talk) 14:28, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Initial comments

Looks good so far, some minor points though:

• No citation errors, no dab links, external links check out (no action req);
• You might consider adding alt text to the images (but of course it is not a requirement and is tedious - so again no action req);
  • Yes, I plan to do this tonight, if I can get the tax return knocked off! AustralianRupert (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
    • Done. AustralianRupert (talk) 09:18, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
• I have reworded the article in a few places, please check you are happy with them and that I haven't misinterpreted your intent;
  • Looks great, thanks for that. AustralianRupert (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
• The last sentence in the 1st paragraph of the prelude seems a little long to me and could be split ("The 15th Brigade Group, consisting of three infantry battalions as well as two troops of tanks, an engineer field company, an artillery battery and a number of smaller support units, under the command of Brigadier Heathcote Hammer[7] was considered to be the most experienced of the Australian units on Bougainville at the time[6] and was moved up to relieve the 7th Brigade, which was in need of rest.[8]");
  • I have broken into two sentences. How does it look now? AustralianRupert (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
    • Looks good to me. Anotherclown (talk) 14:23, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
• This sentence (and the paragraph before it) in the battle section doesn't quite work for me..."After the Australians continued their advance on to Sindou Creek 1 mile (1.6 km) further on, the Japanese launched a number of determined counterattacks over the course of the following week, although these were turned back." Could you perhaps add a linking sentence to end of the previous paragraph?
  • Done, how does it look now? AustralianRupert (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
    • Yep thats fine. Anotherclown (talk) 14:23, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
• I think you should probably ditch this sentence: "But things had not gone all the Australians' way." It makes the article seem written with too much of an Australian emphasis IMO (although I accept that the availability of sources make this inevitable);
  • Done. AustralianRupert (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
• You use the phrase 'lull in the battle' twice in the article, maybe reword one?;
  • Reworded one to "pause". AustralianRupert (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
• Probably no need to describe Savige as 'the Australian corps commander' in the first para of the 'Crossing the Hongorai', as you have already introduced him as such above; and
  • Reworded. AustralianRupert (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
• The sentence "Ultimately they never reached their objective before the war came to an end" in the 'Aftermath' section seems a little out of place chronologically.
  • Removed and slightly reworded the paragraph. I'm thinking that I might write another article on the Mivo advance. That would help tie in the aftermath of Hongorai better. But, alas, that is for a later time when I've got more time on my hands. AustralianRupert (talk) 22:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Anyway that's it for now, more to follow. Anotherclown (talk) 15:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Good work, just one more point before I intend to pass this article. Could the total casualty figures for both sides given in the infobox be worked into the aftermath also? Cheers. Anotherclown (talk) 14:23, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   Well referenced.

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   Well referenced.

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

IMO this is an excellent article. I will leave the one outstanding issue up to your judgement (as there is no reason this should prevent its promotion). Well done. Anotherclown (talk) 17:13, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Done now also, thanks. Anotherclown (talk) 12:28, 17 July 2010 (UTC)