Sakib edit
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it needs some grammar and language check, also it needs some improvement.
Thanks, Historyfeelings - talk 07:10, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Comments
- Reasonable structure to the article, suggest you look at similar FAs to see what level of detail is expected.
- The Karak dab needs to be fixed.
- The link to the name in Arabic shouldn't be a transwiki link, it should be a link to Arabic language followed by the translation.
- A lot of copyediting needs to be done really, I'll point some out but suggest it goes to a good copyeditor as well.
- In general, translate metric units (e.g. 8 km) into Imperial ones (e.g. 8 km (5 mi)).
- A lot of the article is unreferenced, e.g. the "The name" section.
- Per WP:HEAD, that section should just be called "Name" or even better, something like "Etymology"
- Avoid linking very common terms like "water" and "rain" and "mountain" and "valley" for instance.
- Don't link individual dates or years.
- Fix the [citation needed] tag (and provide more citations throughout).
- The various tables and graphs are somewhat messy, if you add more text throughout it might help reduce the clutter.
- Hight should be Height.
- " are: [12] [13] [14]" don't put a space between the colon and the ref, and don't put spaces between refs.
- "maximum temperature Average(°C)" -> "Maximum temperature average (°C)"
- Don't see a need to have the "hide" feature for the table.
- "City is famous for its Olive, fig, Grape and " -> "The city is noted for its olive and fig trees..." no such thing as a Grape tree, avoid capitalising nouns which are not proper nouns.
- Galleries generally avoided, if you expanded the article you could use one or two of these images in the expanded sections.
- References need to be properly formatted, you could use the {{cite web}} template for a consistent look.
The Rambling Man (talk) 13:43, 27 February 2012 (UTC)