Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Operation Crossroads

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. Anotherclown (talk) 12:35, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Crossroads

Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (talk) and HowardMorland (talk)

A series of nuclear tests designed by the US Navy to demonstrate the survivability of ships under and atomic attack. Turned into "the world's first nuclear disaster." Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:52, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see a few cites that could benefit from being split into a footnote section. For example:

  • " The bomb yields are often reported as 21 kilotons, but the figure of 23 kilotons is used consistently throughout this article." is this a quote Daly 1986? "This article" refers to his work or our article?
    • Our article. Tried to reword this to make it clearer. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:00, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As in most tropical ocean locations, its surface winds blow westward and its stratospheric winds blow eastward." Quote? Unref claim?

There are more like this. Once they are all reworked I'll be happy to look at the article again. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:58, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments:

  • time format inconsistencies, for instance "09:00:34 a.m" v "0835";
  • in the lead, are the exact timings necessary. I understand maybe including in the body, but it seems a little too much for the lead. Thoughts?
  • in the lead, "because of the Navy's inability" --> "because of the United State Navy's inability";
  • in the lead, "Crossroads Charlie was rescheduled as" (should Charlie be in italics here for consistency?)
  • in the lead, "fallout of the Baker explosion" (should Baker be in italics here for consistency?)
  • there are some inconsistencies in English variation, e.g. "cancelled" and "canceled"
  • not sure about this, but it doesn't quite sound right to me: "Not enough data were gathered" --> "Not enough data was gathered"?
    • Data is a plural. One datum, two data. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:00, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "General Billy Mitchell" --> Brigadier General Billy Mitchell?
  • not sure about the punctuation here "future of the Navy is at stake,. .. if" (particularly the comma then the full stops);
  • "Commodore William S. "Deak" Parsons then proposed that it be headed by Vice Admiral William H. P. Blandy." (what was Parsons' role?)
    • Who was Parsons? Who was Parsons? Aaaarghh! Added a bit. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:00, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "most men and material" (should this be materiel?)
  • "bomb might make Russia" (should this be "the Soviet Union"?)
  • "On March 6, Commodore Wyatt" --> "On March 6, Wyatt"
  • "The next day, a Navy LST moved them" (perhaps mention LST 861 here, as it is mentioned in the lead but nowhere else?)
  • slightly repetitious: "Able and Baker are the of a previously-used version of the Joint Army/Navy Phonetic Alphabet, used from 1941 until 1956" (previously-used and used);
  • "The two bombs were copies of the plutonium-implosion Fat Man bomb" (should "Fat Man" here be in italics as you have previously displayed it as such?);
    • Have not italicized it. To me, Fat Man is the Mark III nuclear bomb, which was produced between 1945 and 1948, and was superseded by the Mark 4 nuclear bomb in 1949. For some other editors, it is the particular bomb dropped on Nagasaki. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:00, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I got down to the end of Nicknames; will come back later. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:07, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • this seems to be missing something: "proposed that Blandy for the role";
  • not sure about this construction (the mixture of italics, plain type and all caps) "Life Magazine" (is the proper name "Life" or "Life Magazine"?)
    • The proper name id Life. Deleted "Magazine". Hawkeye7 (talk) 13:42, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • should the comma be inside the quote here: the "Geiger men," asserted...;
  • "a notable exception being the Bismarck, which sank upside down but righted herself after her turrets fell out on the way to the bottom" (I wonder if it could be made clearer that Bismarck wasn't sunk during Crossroads);
  • this sentence seems quite awkward: "Air bursts distribute fallout in a large area as it distributes through strong stratospheric currents". AustralianRupert (talk) 10:57, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A few comments, not a complete review:

  • "TJ": terajoules
    • The MOS says not to link common units, where a common unit is broadly defined as an SI unit, or a "non-SI unit officially accepted for use with the SI". The point presumably being that everyone in the world understands SI. Whereas while my Dad still measures his weight in stones and distances in furlongs, it seems that the old measurements are not well known any more. So I've linked it, but if someone comes along and says "you don't link joules, it's SI" then back it goes. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:42, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "To prepare the atoll for Operation Crossroads, Bikini's native residents agreed to evacuate the island. Many were moved to the Rongerik Atoll.": I recommend something like: "In advance of Operation Crossroads, Bikini's native residents agreed to evacuate the island, many to the Rongerik Atoll."
  • "The Baker test resulted in the radioactive contamination of all the target ships.": Many style gurus prefer more verbs and fewer nouns, and some say there's a "buried verb" here, so: The Baker test contaminated all the target ships. ("radioactive" is repeated before and after.) - Dank (push to talk)
  • "The Joint Chiefs of Staff decided that because the Navy was contributing the most men and materiel, that it should be headed by a naval officer.": One "that" too many, and which noun does "it" refer to?
  • "Controlled by the United States": Should start with a noun or noun phrase for parallelism.

I'll stop there. - Dank (push to talk) 01:40, 5 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments

  • Howabout "present" rather than "there"? Most of the starboard side is there
  • The Saratoga article has updated into on the diving activities at Bikini. Which you mention twice, here and later. Probably best to consolidate in one place.
  • Put Oertling in title case.

--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:10, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - what's the difference between "Controlled by the United States" and "In territory controlled by the United States" ? Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 12:22, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well spotted. Hawkeye7 (talk) 12:31, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments

  • Baker target array section, Ships Sunk table shows 9 ships. Ajoining diagram and text says 10. Do I take it that ship #36 in the diagram is Prinz Eugen?
  • Induced radioactivity section (1st paragraph) says: "Other radioisotopes were produced from seawater: hydrogen-3 from hydrogen-2, carbon-14 from oxygen-17, and chlorine-36 from chlorine-35, but..."
  • Induced radioactivity section (2nd paragraph) " 0.4 pounds (0.18 kg) pounds "
  • Bikini after Operation Crossroads section: end of Paragraph 3 and start of Paragraph 4 are very similar.
    • Trimmed and consolidated the two paragraphs. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:43, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do not know how necessary this is, but some attention to notes perhaps? e.g. #43 and #44 are both "Weisgall 1994, pp. 263–265." and #95 is "^ a b Weisgall 1994, pp. 225." Is there a tool for this?

Hamish59 (talk) 14:22, 8 July 2013 (UTC) Additional Comment - I have merged / tidied some more cites. Feel free to revert. 08:30, 9 July 2013 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment/Operation_Crossroads&oldid=1075714153"