Talk:USS Chew

USS Chew 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: May 24, 2013. (Reviewed version).

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 / North America / United States / 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
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	World War II task force

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:USS Chew (DD-106)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tomobe03 (talk · contribs) 22:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC) I'll review this article.--Tomobe03 (talk) 22:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No disambiguation links (no action required)
No duplicate links - actually there was one (WWII) but I removed it myself (no action required)
External links check out (no action required)

There's definitely something missing in After brief repairs at port in New York City, New York and refresher training at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base.
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 20:48, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
... she visits to the Azores ... seems odd to me. I may be wrong, but perhaps "visited Azores" would be better.
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 20:48, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There's also probably something missing in At the outbreak of the attacked Pearl Harbor by the Empire of Japan that morning ...
- Fixed. —Ed!^(talk)
There are several structures like ...arrived at Philadelphia 13 September. Is it possible to omit "on" before date here? I was under an impression it is not, but then again I'm not a native speaker of English, so I cannot be that sure.
- You're right. Fixed. —Ed!^(talk) 20:48, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I made a few copyedits, including one I'd suggest you review (marked so in associated edit summary). Overall nice article, no MOS or referencing issues to speak of.--Tomobe03 (talk) 20:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- Thank you for your review. I've made all of the fixes. —Ed!^(talk) 20:48, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. All clear.--Tomobe03 (talk) 22:19, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]