Wikipedia:Peer review/Birmingham/archive1

Birmingham

I am looking for comments on how to improve the article up to Featured article status. I mainly want advice on the grammar and wording used, but if there are any other points about the article that you feel need to flagged up then please do so. - Erebus555 16:16, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what i would like to see is a list of changes that would be needed to be made. when revieweing would it be possible to add it to the changes required list below? we can then address each one in turn and 'sign it off'16:23, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Better leave that for the article talk page. This is just where other editors/ users can comment on the article and give some advice. - Erebus555 16:39, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The last two paragraphs of "History" state that much has changed since WWII, please expand.
Avoid one-sentence paragraphs.
"Nearby places" doesn't seem relevant. That info would be better communicated using a locational map. The article would benefit from a map of the city.
Tell us what services the City of Birmingham provides its citizens and don't bold Birmingham City Council (nor National City of Sport).
Any crime stats available?
Provide a complete demographic profile of the city (eg. age, household size, etc.) and compare it to West Midlands or England.
"Places of interest" is a vague title, why not "Culture and recreation" or place the recreation parts with the "Sports" section to create a "Sports and recreation" section.
"Famous residents" and "Literature" are just name-dropping. What is the relationship with these people and the city. Sale, Greater Manchester#Notable residents does a good job on this topic.
"Newspapers", "Film", "Television" and "Radio" can be combined into a "Media" section. --maclean 08:05, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Over-referencing in second city sentence in Lead, no references in other sections like "administration".
The Suburb list looks bad. Consider making a template and put it below external links.
Don't user fake headings. Incorporate or just remove.
Transportation is too little for a city of this size. Looks like it was over-summarized.
Many stubby little paragraphs. Expand or merge.
Red links are a no. Create a stub or remove.
Again, I see bolded words being used as headings. Remove or use these =
Science has a list in it.
No see also?

This article is good, but needs some work to make an FA.--trey 19:59, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]