Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Tinian/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Battle of Tinian

[edit]

Battle of Tinian (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

As of 15 August 2024, 19:58 (UTC), this page is active and open for discussion. An FAC coordinator will be responsible for closing the nomination.
Toolbox
Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:23, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The Battle of Tinian isn't as well known as Battle of Saipan, but it was an important part of the Mariana Islands campaign of World War II. It was mostly a US Marines show, but the other services were heavily involved. The battle is a good case study of the process of command decision making. The island became an important base for B-29 bombers and in August 1945 the atomic bombing missions were launched from there, which is what it is best known for today, if at all. There is plenty written about it though, and the article could have gone much deeper into the fighting. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:23, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden: did an image review at A-class. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:28, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Aye. I'd say any image improvement to comsider is more to do with FP than FA. It's fine. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 16:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Gog the Mild

[edit]

Recusing to review and reserving a seat. I'll be back. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • "the Combined Chiefs of Staff". Perhaps 'the US and British Combined Chiefs of Staff' to fill in the blanks for readers not familiar with the nomenclature of the higher echelons during WWII?
    Sure. Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Tinian lay too close to Saipan to allow it to be bypassed and remain in Japanese hands. The 9,000-strong Japanese garrison was eliminated, and the island joined Saipan and Guam as a base for Boeing B-29 Superfortress bombers" is out of chronological order and repeats what is given in more detail later. Suggest deleting.
    Deleted the second sentence. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "ramps mounted on LVTs". In full at first mention please. Or an in line explanation of what LVT means.
    Added explanation. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the Orange plans". Why an upper-case O and lower-case p?
    It is a proper noun. Orange was actually the code name for Japan. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "known as the Orange plans ... along the lines envisaged in the Orange Plan". Plural or singular?
    Plural. Plans were continually updated. There were many variants, such as Orange-Black (Japan + Germany) and Orange-Red (Japan + the UK). Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "By 10 August, Japanese casualties included 404 taken prisoner and 5,745 dead that were buried by the Americans." This leaves some 2,850 unaccounted for. Do any of the sources suggest how they might be accounted?
    Holed up in caves. Some dead, some alive. Some may have escaped to Ajuigan. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It may be worth adding that. If only to clarify that while the battle was over all resistance was not, hence the "Mopping up" section.
    When the Japanese forces were reduced to the point where they were no longer considered a threat to the West Coast of the United States, the American commander would declare the island "secure", and "mopping up" operations would begin. In some cases, more Japanese were killed during mopping up than in the battle. Stan Savige (on Bougainville) and Bob Eichelberger (on Leyte) reported that they had killed more Japanese than G-2 reported were present in the first place, but there were still plenty more. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The paragraph starting "Tinian was considered a target from the outset ..." It would be helpful to state here somewhere the distance between the two islands.
    Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • " On 12 March, the Joint Chiefs of Staff directed Nimitz to neutralize Truk and occupy the Mariana Islands, with a target date of 15 June ... With the conclusion of the Battle of Saipan on 9 July, preparations began for the attack on Tinian." Perhaps a sentence or two on the battle of Saipan?
  • In the lead the battle ends on 2 August ("Resistance continued through 2 August"), in the infobox on 1 August.
    Rewritten. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are several cases where false precision has been introduced - eg 100 feet given as 30.5 m or 1/2 mile as 0.80 km - which could do with reviewing.
    Resolved a few. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... the dry season from November to March, but the wet season from November to March ..." ?
    Oops. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:02, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow. (To the start of opposing forces.) Gog the Mild (talk) 21:22, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • "They were well-trained combat veterans". Perhaps a quick mention of where they had done their fighting to become veterans?
    Alluded to already, but I made more explicit. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:02, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "with its two battalions of 155 mm guns and two battalions of 155 mm howitzers". So how many actual weapons was this? Similarly "for a total of thirteen battalions."
    Each 155mm gun battalion had 12 guns, manned by 26 officers, 2 warrant officers and 529 enlisted men (TO 6-55 31 July 1943). Each 155 mm howitzer battalion had 12 howitzers manned by 29 officers, 2 warrant officers and 500 enlisted men (TO 6-35 15 July 1943). Added that there were twelve tubes per battalion. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:02, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the support of observation aircraft from Stinson OY Sentinel aircraft". Needs some sort of tweak, perhaps delete the first "aircraft"?
    Tweaked the wording. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:02, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "which could be enfilade the White Beaches from defilade of the artillery on Saipan." ?
    deleted "be". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:02, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • "50 dead Japanese were inside." That reads very oddly. How about 'they were garrisoned by 50 Japanese, who were all killed'?
    We don't know that. There might have been more, some of who withdrew, and some of the dead may have committed suicide. Tightened text to clarify that fifty dead Japanese were found inside. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:02, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • What's a UDT?
    Underwater Demolition Team. Added definition and link. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:02, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I have. It reads well. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:47, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Matarisvan

[edit]

I was part of the A Class review at WPMH and found the article to be a great read on an expansive topic. I have some minor suggestions which you could look into, Hawkeye7:

  • Since the 3 units of the US Army were all part of the V Amphibious, perhaps you could wrap these up into a {tree list}?
    Sure. Added a {{tree list}} template. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:30, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • When I looked at the infobox image, I thought it was the only one which didn't have alt text. To my surprise, none of the images have alt texts. Why so? As an aside, many of the images are good ones which could go FP as Adam said, you should look into co-nominating some of them.
    Most of the captions are descriptive of the image, so the alt text would say "refer to caption". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:30, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, how much deeper could we have gone into the fighting? Would it have been day by day details or something more substantial? I ask because that would impact the comprehensiveness.
    Yes, into the day-to-day fighting in greater depth. There is already a subarticle on base development. The article currently has 8,350 words, and going into the fighting in much greater detail would add a great deal more. I feared that there would be complaints that the article was WP:TOOBIG. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:30, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you have the time, I would appreciate if you could look into my recent FA nom, linked here.

On the text in general, a happy support from me. Will try to get a source review done by tomorrow. Matarisvan (talk) 18:52, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Pickersgill-Cunliffe

[edit]

Saving a space. This will be quite the read! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 14:19, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pickersgill-Cunliffe: Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:08, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hawkeye7: Apologies for the delay, will get to this when off work after tomorrow. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 21:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some minor points from me here. A very thorough article. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 13:36, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

[edit]

Hi Hawkeye7, setting this up as a placeholder, will do the review tomorrow. Please feel free to respond after you return from your break. How is the Olympics live experience? Matarisvan (talk) 18:54, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hawkeye7 Here goes:
  • Suggest adding archive links for the following:
Refs #52, #82, #137, #138, #153. Biblio: Aandahl, Franklin & Slany 1958; Bosworth 1944, Cate 1953, Crowl 1960, Dyer 1969, Franklin & Gerber 1961, Harwood 1994, Hoffman 1951, Jones 1944, Melson 1996, Olson & Mortensen 1950, Raines 2000, Richard 1957 (if full text can be archived), Schmidt 1944, Smith 1989, Craven & Cate 1953, Turner 1944. Or you could just run the IA Bot through the page once, and it will add archive URLs for all of the above.
Bot is not working. "Bad title: The page you entered is invalid or doesn't exist. Please check your spelling and try again." Do not see any requirement for it. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:33, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is this ISBN for US Navy Department 1947 valid: 9781460949641? If so, consider adding? Also does this link: 1 cover the full text of the book? If so, consider adding it here along with an archive URL?
    That is for a 2011 Binghamus Press reprint, but my copy is a 1947 edition I found in a second hand bookstore in Boston. They did not have 13-digit ISBNs until 2007. While they may match, the All the book is now available online in the Navy reading room, but it is split; the url link for the pages used in the article is this one. Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:33, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • #17: ok.
  • #26: Mostly ok, just 1 minor issue: The source says Magellan claimed the islands not Legazpi. Perhaps #27 says the latter, can you confirm?
    This was picked up by Wtfiv at the A-class review. "Magellan only landed on Guam. He may have informally claimed it, but not Tinian. The islands were not formally claimed until 1565 by López de Legazpi." Verified this from the other sources, such as Morison and NPS. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:33, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I ran the bot myself, I hope you don't mind. The sources here are hosted at websites of the US Army which may never go down, but prudence and redundancy never hurts. Matarisvan (talk) 07:12, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • #41, #48, #63, #74, #87, #107, #116, #137: all ok.
Almost a pass, only the archive URLs and the ISBN/link for the aforementioned source need to be added. Matarisvan (talk) 13:21, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The source review is a pass now. Cheers Matarisvan (talk) 07:13, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
  • The infobox image is public domain with a valid PD tag.
  • Map of the Battle of Tinian (1944).svg is a featured image. It has a relevant CC tag.
  • The remaining images are all PD photographs that are taken by the US military, generally marines or navy. These have appropriate PD tags.
  • The dominance of images from the US armed forces is understandable but to provide a more neutral point of view, it would be good to have some contemporary illustrations from the perspective of the local populous or the Japanese. Are these available? simongraham (talk) 20:29, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    NPOV is always a problem with the Pacific War articles, as one side was nearly annihilated. Sometimes we have POW interrogation records, but not always, and Japanese sources are often not translated. We have no Japanese photographs of the battle on Commons, which is not unusual. The local population was deported to Japan after the war, so today, the island is inhabited by Chamorros who came from other islands and their descendants. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 06:12, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That is a very good point. Accessing Japanese literature is likely a requisite for criteria 1b and 1d. Although not strictly part of the image review, I did quick search of the Japanese Memorial Museum for Soldiers, Detainees in Siberia, and Postwar Repatriates[2] and it brought up a few short papers that I feel could be more easily translated with an online translator, including Battle of Tinian: The Island of Suicide (Japanese: 玉砕の島テニアン戦記)[3], Neither Surrender nor Suicide: Surviving the Suicide Mission on Tinian (Japanese: 降伏せず自決せず 玉砕地テニアンを生き抜く)[4] and Tinian Island War Chronicles: Surviving Without Surrender (Japanese: テニアン島戦記 降伏せず生き抜く)[5]. Please do take a look and see if these are helpful. simongraham (talk) 18:47, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have added them to the article. No images though. :( Hawkeye7 (discuss) 12:15, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sadly, I think that will be in case.
  • Suggest adding Japanese Peace Memorial - Tinian - panoramio (1).jpg, which is included in the Japanese wikipedia article.
  • Add ALT text to the images for accessibility. simongraham (talk) 12:22, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 18:10, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Battle_of_Tinian/archive1&oldid=1240501262"