183:
It's way off GA class let alone A class, GA comes before A class. It needs a lot of work throughout, many poorly sourced sections, dubious sourcing in the lower sections in particular. I'd close the peer review for now, a lot of the issues are obvious, I can help you with it over the next few weeks
241:
OK—thanks for taking a look. I agree with your assessment, and I agree that the peer review can be closed. I don't have the time to put into improving the article just yet, but maybe these suggestions can serve as a guideline for future attempts, whether my own or those of another dedicated editor.
157:
to A-Class without any further comment or explanation. IMO it's definitely not Start-class anymore, but it's not at the level of A-Class for sure. It's been a while since I've made any major contributions on
Knowledge, but, as a major contributor to the article over the years, I figured I'd request
188:
which I recently promoted for what is expected for cities. But it really needs a rewrite from scratch I think and needs an awful lot of work and I'm not sure I want to commit that much time to it without further assistance from the others. If you want to start somewhere:
215:
A good article on Da Nang should have a fairly detailed section on
Landmarks, think temples, theatres. museums, monuments, hotels and restaurants, notable squares/streets etc.
76:
274:
126:
69:
255:
174:
122:
158:
peer review to get an idea of how to improve the article, with the aim of eventually raising it to at least GA-Class.
107:
62:
50:
99:
228:
17:
199:
Try to use google books if you can and avoid some of the shoddy tourist sites if possible throughout.
44:
250:
209:
Administration section could use some chunks of text about the city government and administration
169:
259:
235:
178:
203:
227:
for some ideas and also note how books are used and notes. Hope this helps for starters ♦
196:
Convert education, infrastructure and transport into decent prose and avoid bullet points.
268:
244:
163:
115:
153:
I've listed this article for peer review after seeing that an editor recently
224:
220:
185:
92:
202:
Ensure that every source is adequately filled out with
154:
141:
134:
103:
184:if you like but have a look at something like
70:
8:
150:This peer review discussion has been closed.
193:Culture onwards to the end needs sourcing.
77:
63:
32:
212:Ensure that every paragraph is sourced.
35:
7:
24:
236:20:33, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
219:As I say see articles such as
179:19:38, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
1:
260:15:31, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
291:
206:info, publisher, date etc.
275:October 2013 peer reviews
155:changed its assessment
18:Knowledge:Peer review
204:Template:Citation
142:Watch peer review
87:
86:
282:
258:
253:
233:
177:
172:
139:
130:
111:
79:
72:
65:
47:
33:
290:
289:
285:
284:
283:
281:
280:
279:
265:
264:
254:
249:
229:
173:
168:
145:
120:
97:
91:
83:
51:Manual of Style
43:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
288:
286:
278:
277:
267:
266:
263:
262:
217:
216:
213:
210:
207:
200:
197:
194:
152:
147:
146:
144:
90:
85:
84:
82:
81:
74:
67:
59:
56:
55:
54:
53:
48:
38:
37:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
287:
276:
273:
272:
270:
261:
257:
252:
247:
246:
240:
239:
238:
237:
234:
232:
226:
222:
214:
211:
208:
205:
201:
198:
195:
192:
191:
190:
187:
181:
180:
176:
171:
166:
165:
159:
156:
151:
143:
138:
137:
133:
128:
124:
119:
118:
114:
109:
105:
101:
96:
95:
89:
88:
80:
75:
73:
68:
66:
61:
60:
58:
57:
52:
49:
46:
45:Copying check
42:
41:
40:
39:
34:
29:
26:
19:
243:
230:
218:
182:
162:
160:
149:
148:
135:
131:
117:Article talk
116:
112:
93:
27:
231:Dr. Blofeld
104:visual edit
225:Marrakesh
269:Category
245:dragfyre
164:dragfyre
161:Thanks,
221:Aalborg
186:Aalborg
127:history
108:history
94:Article
36:Toolbox
28:Da Nang
136:Watch
16:<
251:ʞןɐʇ
223:and
170:ʞןɐʇ
123:edit
100:edit
271::
242:--
140:•
125:|
106:|
102:|
256:c
248:_
175:c
167:_
132:·
129:)
121:(
113:·
110:)
98:(
78:e
71:t
64:v
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.