Talk:Japanese destroyer Kusunoki (1945)

Japanese destroyer Kusunoki (1945) has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: August 24, 2020. (Reviewed version).

Japan: Military history Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project, participate in relevant discussions, and see lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 19:59, November 16, 2024 (JST, Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the joint Japanese military history task force.

WikiProject Japan to do list:

Peer review: None
A-class review: None

Featured content candidates –

Articles: None
Pictures: None
Lists: None

Good article nominations: Vinland Saga (TV series), Godzilla Minus One
Add requested images to articles that need them.
Pages for Deletion: Participate in Japan-related deletion discussions.
Improve and expand Japan-related stubs.
Create some requested articles.
Help translate an article from the Japanese Wikipedia into English.
Assess unassessed articles

Ships

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ships, a project to improve all Ship-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other articles, please join the project, or contribute to the project discussion. All interested editors are welcome. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.ShipsWikipedia:WikiProject ShipsTemplate:WikiProject ShipsShips articles

Military history: Maritime / Asian / Japanese / World War II

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Associated task forces:
/
	Maritime warfare task force
	Asian military history task force
	Japanese military history task force
	World War II task force

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Japanese destroyer Kusunoki (1945)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 22:12, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I will take this one. Zawed (talk) 22:12, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Only six sources are used, and the article probably could go more in depth in the Construction and Service section. It could use more pictures, too. BlacknoseDace(say something. I'm lonely!)^{[I'm not a reference!]} 22:53, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Should this picture be added to the article?

-- GravityIsForSuckers (talk) 06:27, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

..was one of escort destroyers...: a number missing here? "one of [how many] escort destroyers...?

Construction and service

Inconsistency in launch date compared to infobox
- Good catch
The service history is pretty light but perhaps that is to be expected given she was only completed in the last year of the war. Nevitt mentions a couple of aerial engagements in May, plus identifies her first captain, worth including?
- Yeah, not much to work with here. I tried to track down American aircraft operations over Japan. The carriers were all busy down around Okinawa and the few USAAF minelaying operations that I could pin down weren't anywhere near Osaka or Yokosuka on those dates, so I have no idea what aircraft she fired upon. Unless they're notable, I generally don't bother with ship captains.

Bibliography

Can I can get a check on the place of publication for Stille, I thought Osprey was based in Oxford?
- Botley is in Oxford.

That's it for me. Zawed (talk) 22:36, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your time reviewing this.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:10, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, looks OK and passing as GA since I believe that it meets the necessary criteria - well written, reasonably covers topic, reliably sourced, and illustrated appropriately. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 08:29, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]