Talk:Myanmar and the World Bank

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 October 2018 and 15 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tyler12gilbert. Peer reviewers: Daniel Carnahan.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:20, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Edits
Suggested links to improve the accuracy of the information on this page:

https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/myanmar/overview#3

https://projects.worldbank.org/en/projects-operations/projects-summary?lang=en&countrycode_exact=MM

https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/myanmar/publication/myanmar-economic-monitor-reports

https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2020/05/18/new-world-bank-group-partnership-framework-for-myanmar-puts-strong-focus-on-social-inclusion-and-peace

https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/myanmar/publication/myanmar-economic-transition-amid-conflict-a-systematic-country-diagnostic

https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/132341486543566177/myanmar-country-partnership-framework-for-the-period-2015-2017

https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/525641468323339122/myanmar-interim-strategy-note-for-the-period-fy13-14

https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/wdr/wdr-archive

1. End of first sentence should read “there have been measurable”. Overall the page has a good introduction. Intro could use a portion that leads into World Bank projects more as that is what the page is predominately about. 2. Good structure, a lot of information is given. Charts help with comprehension. Lists are easy to read. There are embedded links. 3. The Rohingya Displacement section seems to be slightly off topic to the rest of the article. It is also a small section on a huge issue, this would need to be expanded on and tied into the rest of the article further. 4. The first portion says “considered to be” but doesn't say by whom. The rest of the page is mostly neutral. 5. First portion needs to be cited. Source 5 does not say where it is from. All sources are reliable.

Isabellakdesilva (talk) 17:02, 6 December 2018 (UTC)isabellakdesilva

1. Strong opening statement, it would benefit from a source to verify the claim 2.I would provide more detail about the Partnership framework as you simply cited its existence but didn’t explain its purpose. 3. For 1956-1961 section, I would provide more details on the specifics on the projects and provide links to the specific sources related to this information. 4. For the 1973 -1987 section, I would sharpen the language about the "biggest projects “ as that could be interpreted in various ways. 5. In terms of organization, I would under the World Bank Projects section, separate the time period sections and the specific project sections into two different topics.

Daniel Carnahan102 (talk) 20:22, 7 December 2018 (UTC)