| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I hope this passage can upgrade to FA. What can improve in your eyes?
Thanks, Asiaworldcity (talk) 12:55, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
Finetooth comment: Just for starters, the article has a dozen or so links that seem to be dead. See details here. It also has three dabs, as identified here. Finetooth (talk) 19:20, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
Comments from Noleander
- Asiaworldcity: it looks like you have not made any edits to this article. It is customary (not to say required) for editors considering FAC to make some effort to improve the article towards meeting the FA criteria, which are described at Wikipedia:Featured_article_criteria
- You should also review the prior FA nomination at Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Hong_Kong/archive4 and make sure all the issues addressed there have been fixed.
- As Finetooth says above, another task is to click all the links in the Toolbox in the upper-right corner of this PR page, and make sure any issues there get resolved.
- After a quick glance, the article appears comprehensive and well-sourced, but I can see a few, relatively minor, issues with prose.
- I'd be happy to do a full Peer Review on the prose after you make a pass through the article yourself. Or, perhaps another reviewer will want to jump in before that.
End Noleander comments. --Noleander (talk) 14:51, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Comments from Knight of Gloucestershire: Although this article has a few issues, I believe it won't be hard for us to sort out all the problems and solve them. I personally will keep an eye on it until it's perfect.