# Talk:Japanese destroyer Hagi (1944)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Japanese destroyer Hagi (1944)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Eddie891 (talk · contribs) 13:11, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Will review shortly. Best, Eddie891  Talk Work  13:11, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Comments
link repatriate?
"them even more suited for mass production" unclear to me what 'them' refers to here
"The accuracy of the Type 89 guns was severely reduced against aircraft because no high-angle gunnery director was fitted" could you simplify this sentence? I don't think it makes very much sense to somebody who's unfamiliar with ships. Maybe add an explanation why the absence of a director made the guns inaccurate against aircraft
That would require explaining the function of a director, which is a bit outside the remit of this article. A link to director will have to suffice.
"Hagi (Bush Clover)" Why not mention this in the lede?
The lede's a summary of the article and I don't feel that a translation of the name is appropriate.
"Fiscal Year 1943 " why the caps?
'Cause that's how I always see them in my sources, especially in government ones.
"for a speed of 27.8 knots" so was this the top speed?
Not covered in my sources, but I believe that that was the best that could be achieved by the revised hull design coupled with the existing powerplant.
"Tachibana sub-class"
I don't understand what the problem is here.
I answered my own question-- forgot to remove the bullet point
what makes combinedfleet.com a reliable source?
It's run by two published authors on the IJN.
A short article, but comprehensive as far as I can tell. Minor, subjective comments. Eddie891  Talk Work  13:58, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the review.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:46, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
meets all the criteria. Passing Eddie891  Talk Work  15:57, 8 September 2020 (UTC)