Macau edit
I've listed this article for peer review before submitting again for FAC because this article failed to become an FA article from the last nomination. I have already tried my best to improve many aspects according to the comment given by last FAC. Please give me opinion/comment so that I can improve the article promptly. Thanks! Coloane 00:30, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR t 19:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. The red links should be fixed. Also, I find some of the images unnecessary to the topic (some of the tourism-related photos are place outside of tourism). You can refer to New York City. -- Starczamora (talk) 22:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Reply - Which tourism-related photos are place outside of tourism and unnecessary(e.g. Macau Tower?, Sands Casino?)? can you specifically point them out so that I can remove them right away? as for red links that you mentioned, I think these links are not related to the improvement of this article. Coloane (talk) 21:45, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- Reply - The photos of Lotus Square and Ruins of Saint Paul seem out of place in relation to the section they are posted IMO. Starczamora (talk) 01:32, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Reply - Which tourism-related photos are place outside of tourism and unnecessary(e.g. Macau Tower?, Sands Casino?)? can you specifically point them out so that I can remove them right away? as for red links that you mentioned, I think these links are not related to the improvement of this article. Coloane (talk) 21:45, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. The red links should be fixed. Also, I find some of the images unnecessary to the topic (some of the tourism-related photos are place outside of tourism). You can refer to New York City. -- Starczamora (talk) 22:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)