Wikipedia:Peer review/List of development projects in Dubai/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review ,because in my point of view it can well become a featured list
Thanks, Nabil rais2008 (talk) 15:34, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Brianboulton comments:-
- Lead: I suspect that English is not your first language, and as a result the whole lead needs a thorough copyedit; the prose is weak. Here are several examples:-
- "from oil-based economy" → "from an oil-based economy"
- "real estate and other developments..." What is the nature of these "other developments"?
- "2004-2007" requires an en-dadsh, not a hyphen
- Second sentence bgins "It is a part..." What does "It" refer to?
- "Dubai Strategic plan 2015" - if this is a formal policy document, "plan" should be "Plan"
- There are multiple issues with the rest of the second sentence: part of the Dubai Strategic Plan (capital P); comma after "ruler of Dubai"; "maintain economic growth" not the economic growth"; "to bring Dubai on the map of the world" presumably should be "to put Dubai on the world map".
- "iconic city" - is Dubai a city? I thought it was an emirate.
- These are only examples - my list could be much longer. Hence the need for a full copyedit
- Lists: I've only looked at the first one, which looks unfinished.
- Empty spaces in some of the "Developer" cells
- Some estimated completion dates cited, others not. What are the sources for the uncited dates? Also some blank cells. From a presentational viewpoint dates look best centred in the column
- Costs: currencies not clear - what is AED? What is Dhs? Does $ refer to US dollars? If so, why does one cell dhow "USD"? Amounts should be formatted consistently you have, for example, "$ 4 billion", "$81 billion", USD 16 Billion, USD 275,000 etc. Also some amounts are cited, others not. And there are blanks.
- Why are the "areas" useful information? The diverse nature of these projects means that areas are in no way comparable.
- Most of the information in the Descripion column is uncited.
- Similar comments apply to the other lists.
- References: all bare urls at the moment. They need to be properly formatted, with (minimally) title, publisher and last access date.
In conclusion, I think this has been brought prematurely to peer review, and much more work is required before it can be considered properly. Brianboulton (talk) 23:48, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
I am currently working on this article, thanks for your valuable suggestions and comments.