Wikipedia:Peer review/Beijing/archive2

Beijing

 * Previous peer review
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for July 2008.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for July 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because…it's been nearly 16 months since the last peer review, which took place March 2007. Now that the Olympics are coming up, I'd like to hear some improvement suggestions so that I can nominate this article to at least GA status (maybe FA is a possiblility if we work hard enough!)

Thanks, Andrewlp1991 (talk) 00:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

The order of sections could use an overhaul, and some sections could be combined with others. While there's no real guideline for international cities, it might help to review the guidelines for US cities and UK cities.

I would recommend focusing on improving prose within main sections, and reducing the number of 2nd and 3rd level subsection headers. Integrate information better into the main topics.

The 'education' section is really just a big list of schools, and many of them are red links. This section should talk about the overall education programs in the city, from the primary schools on up to higher education. How many students are in the city? How many teachers? How are schools ranked? A list of schools can be linked to from this article, but there isn't much value in having that list in this article itself.

The 'architecture' section seems to have very little content and a big gallery. I'd recommend nuking the gallery and focusing more on the content. Maybe move the section to 'geography' and call it cityscape to integrate it in with a discussion of neighborhoods. How does architecture vary in the different parts of the city, for example? Speaking of which, the 'neighborhoods' section is really just a bulleted list, and a collection of tables. This should be converted to prose. The tables themselves offer little value. Move the 'city layout' main section into the 'geography' section.

Change 'politics' to 'government and politics'. There's two important topics that need to be discussed here: local city government and the national capital and government. While I still think that individual subsections should be discouraged, a separate subsection for the national government would be acceptable here.

The 'sports' section needs a bit of work. Let's try and nuke that bulleted list and discuss something abuot sports. The mention of the 2008 summer olympics seems to go straight from that, to what appears to be an advertising promotion for Mike Davis' book Planet of Slums, which doesn't seem appropriate. I'm sure we can find out more about this topic for the article. Don't forget to discuss other sports that take place in the city at other times during the year. The olympics is pretty much a single event.

Try to keep 'see also' items on topic. What in the heck does Yanjing Beer have to do with the city, other than the fact that it's probably brewed here. It seems a bit like an advertising promotion to me?

Those are the big issues as I see them. It's good to see some interest with this article right now, though I wish people started a bit earlier. Not sure if we'll get FA before the olympics or not; GA, maybe? Though there are some at WP:GAN that like to stress the importance of the 'stability' criterion of WP:WIAGA, so the GA review may have to wait until the olympics are over,... Dr. Cash (talk) 02:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)