Wikipedia:Peer review/Architecture of Angola/archive1

Architecture of Angola

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I will improve it by looking the reviews. It shows the architecture of the Angola. It is interesting to review, by looking this it includes amount of interesting information.

Thanks, Colinlixiangji (talk) 14:53, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by KJP1

You've put a lot of work and effort into this. Well done for that. It's an interesting topic and certainly warrants an article on here. Some suggestions/ideas below.

Follow good examples. Find some similar articles, ideally of GA or FA standard, to get an idea of how they approach studies of national architectures. The portal for the Wikipedia Architecture project is a good place to start, Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture and some like these, Architecture of Madagascar, Architecture of Norway could be helpful. The first uses a structure based on building materials, the second takes a historical approach.
Use of the first person. We don't write articles in the first person, e.g. "In this articles, I will discuss the architecture of Angola." This stuff needs to come out.
Prose - this needs some work. There are some errors and sometimes the meaning isn't clear, e.g. "The campaign began with a resumption of free fiction. The name is a photo coffee table book."
Structure - I don't think this quite works. The first section is about the 20th century but it is very general and doesn't tell me much about architecture in Angola. Also, what about pre-20th century construction? Then we get a section on cinemas. Sure, this has a place, but I doubt they're the most important part of Angolan architecture. Then the section on settlement patterns, while useful, doesn't tell me much about buildings. Then there's a section on 21st century plans and finally a bit on churches. I think you need to rethink the structure of the article.
References - refs. are king on Wikipedia. We like lots of them. As a minimum, every paragraph needs a cite. For an article on a country's architecture you will need a lot more than 7 to meet GA standard. Norway's got 40 and actually that's a bit light. I don't think it would make GA today as quite a lot of the sections are uncited.

Best of luck with working the article up. KJP1 (talk) 07:19, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]