Wikipedia:Peer review/George Town, Penang/archive2

George Town, Penang

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 feel that this article could be nominated for the Good Article status. Suggestions and recommendations to further improve this article are welcomed.

Thanks, Vnonymous 09:01, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

comments groupuscule (talk) 04:30, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have done quite a lot of work on this article. Congratulations, it's looking very impressive.

Lead

Is the whole city a World Heritage Site or just this part? (Or does that map show both the whole city proper and the WHS?)
"large assortment of colonial and Asian eclectic architectural styles" — OK, close, but I think "eclectic assortment of colonial and Asian architectural styles" would work better, since in my understanding "eclectic" is more a property of an assortment than of an individual style.
"hosts intangible cultural heritage, such as that of the Peranakan (formerly known as the Straits Chinese)" is to my ears (eyes) an awkward way of introducing the existence of a unique ethnicity.
The toggle map is cool. To be very picky (I suppose that's what you want if you're asking for a peer review) it might be better for the third option to say "show both" rather than "show all" ("show all" in the context of the other two options makes me think I'm going to see all of Malaysia but when I'm actually getting is just both maps together). Not sure if this is something you can even change so don't worry about it if you can't.
A city map somewhere near the top of the article would be helpful.

Etymology

I love etymology and etymology sections in Wikipedia articles but in this case you could probably incorporate this information into the history section.

History > Founding of George Town

This section could begin a little differently. The relationship between the British and Dutch isn't clear in the first sentence, and no time period is given. The source appended to the first sentence is not very strong and not closely related to the sentence.
The article by Usman Haji Yaakob and Nik Norliati Fitri Md Nor (2013) looks pretty good and you can probably use it at Penang also. I noticed in searing it that it spells the city with no space: "Georgetown". Plenty of other sources seem to do that also. Perhaps it would be reasonable to include that as an alternate way to write the name?
Was Light given any specific instructions with respect to Penang Island? (Implied but not clear.)
Second paragraph is good but a more scholarly source would be preferable. The quotation from Light (in what context did he say or write this? the referenced article doesn't say) doesn't need to be in italics as well as quotation marks.
Third paragraph: Kedah is linked twice. Penang Island has already been linked a few times. IMHO you don't need to wikilink these things every time; in fact, just the first time is OK; or possibly 2–3 times, for the readers convenience, if the same term is mentioned in faraway parts of the article . "Administrator III" at http://www.visitpenang.gov.my is not an optimal source.
Fourth paragraph: above comments apply here as well. Lonely Planet is not an optimal source. Also, did they raise the standard Union Jack, or the Flag of the East India Company?
Sources in the next paragraph, and the next, look better but some lack key information and some are formatted strangely. Nordin 2005 looks especially good and could perhaps be used more. (Here and in related articles.) Description of early city layout and its lasting influence looks solid.
Last two paragraphs lack refs. Not a big deal for the first of these, which deals with information possibly constituting common knowledge. The final paragraph is a little enigmatic.
Somewhere here there should be a reference to or description of the conditions prevailing in this area before the city was founded.
The "Plan of Fort Cornwallis" map is key -- could be bigger and more prominent. (Statue and grave of Light are less important.)

> Colonial era

second paragraph starts: "Nonetheless, George Town continued to retain a secondary importance to Singapore." but I think the intended meaning is that George Town remained important, not that it remained of secondary importance to Singapore.
Spice farming is interesting (and particular spices could be mentioned though maybe this would too greatly counteract the goal of brevity). Reference is broken.
Reference for mercantile firms and banks? Which firms and banks?
Next two paragraphs are interesting and look reasonable but would be improved by the addition of sources.
Last paragraph in this section also very interesting and unsourced.

> World Wars

Second paragraph (and lack of indication to the contrary) implies that nothing much changed between 1914 and 1941. True?
Quotations don't need to be italicized. (I'll stop repeating this now.) Also you don't need all these links inside the quotation, especially not to topics which have all been well-linked already.
Reference and more information needed about women being taken as comfort women for the Japanese army. Some explanation of this photograph's origins might be appropriate.
A web search indicates that the Penang Shimbun was a newspaper published by the Japanese during the occupation. Maybe a word or two clarifying this would be good. Not sure if there should be an article on it.

To be continued.

I have made significant edits to the article as per your recommendations.

Lead

Is the whole city a World Heritage Site or just this part? (Or does that map show both the whole city proper and the WHS?)

Done You are right. That particular map shows the whole city centre, which includes the WHS. The WHS actually covers the oldest quarters of the city, not the entire city.

"large assortment of colonial and Asian eclectic architectural styles" — OK, close, but I think "eclectic assortment of colonial and Asian architectural styles" would work better, since in my understanding "eclectic" is more a property of an assortment than of an individual style.

Done

"hosts intangible cultural heritage, such as that of the Peranakan (formerly known as the Straits Chinese)" is to my ears (eyes) an awkward way of introducing the existence of a unique ethnicity.

Done What do you think of this rephrase ? hosts unique cultural heritage, such as the Peranakans

The toggle map is cool. To be very picky (I suppose that's what you want if you're asking for a peer review) it might be better for the third option to say "show both" rather than "show all" ("show all" in the context of the other two options makes me think I'm going to see all of Malaysia but when I'm actually getting is just both maps together). Not sure if this is something you can even change so don't worry about it if you can't.

Unfortunately, I can't change that. When I added the maps, this seems to be the default setting. Probably something to do with the mechanism of the infobox in question.

A city map somewhere near the top of the article would be helpful.

If I am not wrong, there is a map of Penang Island somewhere in the middle of this article, showing the relative locations of George Town and its suburbs.

Etymology

Done

History> Founding of George Town

Done I seem to have misunderstood the part regarding Francis Light (who indeed acted under the instructions of the Company), the British East India Company and the Kedah Sultan as well. I consulted some additional sources, so hopefully this modification I made clarifies what happened in the years leading up to the acquisition of Penang Island by the British East India Company. Essentially, Light was ordered to take Penang Island from Kedah in 1786, at a time when the British were facing threats from the Dutch and the French due to their involvement in the American Revolution. A treaty was first signed in Kedah, before Francis Light's actual landing on the island in July 1786. The Union Jack, not the Company flag, was raised the next month (as the painting in one of the sources shows).

The 1799 map of the city has also been enlarged and the Lonely Planet source removed.

An aside: as for the city's naming conventions, the city is officially named George Town. If you look at Malaysian IDs and passports belonging to any George Town resident, you will see that the city's name is George Town (speaking from personal experience). The street signs within the city (as well as highways leading to the city) also bear the name George Town. So I presume that the name Georgetown being used by some sources is just a case of misspelling; prior instances of federal government agencies using the term Georgetown have since been corrected. Also, the name of the city as per the UNESCO WHS listing is George Town.^[1]

> Colonial era

Done Added more cites, particularly for the unsourced paragraphs. The source I read regarding the merchant firms listed a number of German and British companies (these were not banks, but companies which focused on the sea trade, import and export of commodities and machinery, and the like), but given that the sentence is already quite long, I felt it prudent to limit the examples to just Standard Chartered and HSBC.

> World Wars

Done Added a few cites, especially the part about comfort women (and the accompanying image).

As for the interwar period between 1918 and 1941, there isn't much of special note in the city. Based on the sources I read, it seems like the city was pretty much business as usual during those years.

Looking forward to more feedback from you, and thank you so much for all this. Vnonymous 11:47, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

... continued groupuscule (talk) 10:42, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you find some of these comments helpful. I see your point about the spelling of the name "George Town" and concur. As far as the map goes, I see a few, including the pink WHS one linked above. It might make sense to feature a map which shows the outlines of the city, maybe major roads, maybe major landmarks. But I dunno, this isn't a must.

In the history section and I suppose anywhere there's always going to be room for improvement. Skimming over these sections and the sources again I am wondering if maybe there's a book or two that could be brought in. Something that really goes in depth and is scholarly about sources. I see there's not a whole lot; maybe this search on WorldCat helps. Continuing with the line-by-line:

History > Post-War

You may be able to compress the first two paragraphs here if the information is already covered at Penang. Better yet at Crown Colony of Penang; you could even move one or two of these sentences there.
Can you explain free port status? Free economic zone could be linked though it's pretty sparse.
"On the other hand, this also" doesn't seem like the right phrase when you're talking about depression after unemployment.
FYI I had to look up white elephant. Keep it but maybe wikilink to this article.
This section has better sources than the others, though noticeably they are disproportionately about brain drain.

> Renaissance

Right off the bat this seems like a questionable periodization (makes me think of Pittsburgh and Detroit "Renaissances"). But OK let's move ahead.
"protected from urban development by to the"
First paragraph seems perfectly plausible but lacks sources.
Seven footnotes is a lot to support an unambiguous ranking by a specific organization. Here of all places is where the article doesn't need a concentration of sources.
Economic data are lacking considering that economic downs and ups are being heavily emphasized as the main features of history in the past decades.
Is this last source in the history section ("[George Town a city again https://web.archive.org/web/20150326180134/http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/george-town-a-city-again]", Malaysia Insider 2015) really correct that the city status applies to all of Penang Island?? Must one say that George Town is a subdivision of Penang [City]?

Geography

Nice aerial photo.
Good section.
If a map of the metro area isn't up top it should be here, since that's the main topic.

> UNESCO World Heritage Site

Layout is a little crowded. These images are good though.
Quotations don't need to be in italics.
Preferable to use another source regarding GT's architectural gemhood.
"World Heritage Site" doesn't need to be linked again and again.
18 meter height restriction could be referenced—web search turns up [1] but this article is not definitive—ideally with a site which also describes the other restrictions alluded to.

> Street names

Preference for older street names is extremely plausible, and here it is well-described and interesting, but if possible should come with a reference, so that readers know this is not one persons ungeneralizable opinion.

> Suburbs

Map to the left says "Georgetown". By the way is this the map with suburbs you're talking about? It's okay but the pinpoints on an outline, with nothing to show population density or streets, feel a little sparse.

> Hills

Good

> Parks

Third use of the term "green lung", now starting to feel a little excessive.
Otherwise, good. I wish there was room for more pictures.

> Drainage system

OK. Do you want to use this system to talk about water supply also?

> Climate

Sounds nice.
Section is good too.

Government and politics

Overall it seems like this section is long on Penang government institutions located in George Town, and short on the government and politics concerning George Town city itself.

> Local government

Good; links to City Council of Penang Island, an article which incidentally touches on the "city status" dispute (which I asked about above); maybe this issue should be mentioned more directly in the main article.

> Penang state government

As it's not a government of George Town only, this section might be shortened.
No period needed after "19th"
Expanding list seems weird at first but makes good sense.

> Federal constituencies

Is George Town indeed the "capital of Penang", given this issue about city status?
"befitting its status as an important Malaysian city." - unnecessary.

To be continued.

Well, I do have a few books about the streets and buildings in George Town. They are reasonably well-researched, and the authors are of certain repute even in Penang. Seeing that each building and street could have a history of its own, which is connected to the history of the city in general, I can try to use them more when appropriate. :)

History>>Post-war

Done Compressed the first two paragraphs.
Done I added a bit of explanation about the meaning of the term free port in the founding of George Town, which essentially meant that any ship that traded at the free port need not pay any form of tax/levies/etc.
Done Removed on the other hand
Done Removed white elephant as well, as recent developments at Komtar suggests that more efforts have been completed to attract visitors, so the term white elephant doesn't sound really right.
Done True, there seems to be too many cites, though not all are about brain drain, as there is one that mentioned about the competition from Port Klang and the decline of Penang's harbour. Removed one cite.

History>>Renaissance

Done Corrected by to. An oversight on my part.
Done Added a few cites which described the emptying out of the heritage zone after the repeal of that Act.
Done Removed some cites from the part about ECA rankings... There is some economic data at the economy section mid-article. Then again, the biggest issue I face is that most statistics regarding the economy are about Penang in general; I can't seem to find much when it comes to the city's specific economic performance. This applies elsewhere in Malaysia; it seems that economic performances are measured by states, not cities. Only KL has a complete set of data, due to the virtue of it being governed as a separate city entity.

Now George Town's city status is quite another pickle. It was indeed granted city status by Queen Elizabeth II in 1957, which has not been legally repealed since. At the moment, George Town comes under the administration of the Penang Island City Council, which has jurisdiction for the entire Penang Island. But the City Council is still based in George Town, within the City Hall. So in effect, it can be said that the effective jurisdiction of George Town has been extended to the entire island, de facto... Sometimes the Feds here have a tendency to do alot of confusing stuff; urban planning is one of them.

Geography>>UNESCO World Heritage Site

Done Removed italics from quotations.
Done Added a neutral book cite.
Done Added a cite regarding the management of heritage buildings within the zone. Another cite about the 18 metre height restriction (from UNESCO) is added too.
Done Removed overlinking of WHS

Geography>>Street names

Done Though I don't have any cite indicating the level of conservatism among Penangites, I do have a cite regarding how a street sign was vandalised as it did not match the street's prior history. I hope this news article is good enough for now.^[2]

Geography>>Suburbs

Done Corrected 'Georgetown'... And yes, this is the map I mentioned. As for the densities of each suburbs, I could not find any data on that, unfortunately. Seems the census does not go deep enough.

Geography>>Parks

Done Removed overmentioning the term 'green lung'

Geography>>Drainage system

Not much, considering the rivers in George Town don't play such an important role these days. So better to keep it short.

Geography>>Parks

Done Removed overmentioning the term 'green lung'

Government and politics>>Local government

Done Added a sentence about NGOs being allocated 4 of the 24 councillor seats. Hopefully this should suffice.

Government and politics>>State government

Done Removed the period after 19th

Government and politics>>Federal constituencies and agencies

Done Removed the period after 19th... George Town is indeed still the capital of Penang. The state government is still based in the city, both the legislative assembly and the executive.

Vnonymous 12:37, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

continued again groupuscule (talk) 16:26, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're fast! And I'm slow. But I reckoned that by doing installments I could stay focused on each part of this long article. (Also I am learning a lot by reading it carefully.) The changes you're making look good.

Demographics

Good. Maybe source the second-to-last paragraph (in this opening).

> Ethnicities

Maybe explain somewhere that Bumiputera means indigenous southeast Asians including but not limited to Malaysians. (The chart is confusing after reading the text because the text now says Bumiputeras includes ethnic Malaysians, but it doesn't say who else it includes or what the term means.)
How do the Peranakans fit into this ethnicity chart? This seems like a big question mark. How many of them are there? Are they required by the Statistics Department to identify themselves as either Malaysian or Chinese?
The referenced article at Singapore Infopedia actually looks pretty solid but it's a little unclear who the author is. Adding another source or two wouldn't hurt and the Infopedia article has a lot of good-looking ones in its references section.
Small grammar suggestions in last paragraph: "part of the 'Malaysia My Second Home' programme" ; "as ~~was~~ did a Jewish enclave".

> Languages

Good section.
Suggestion "As with the rest" -> "As in the rest"
"... steps are being taken ..." at whose initiative?

> Housing

80%+ high-rise housing! Wow.

Economy

You don't need to link Malaysia and you may not need to link GDP but you could link to Economy of Malaysia somewhere in this section.
"other tertiary sectors" could be replaced by a clearer phrase. (For one thing I think the idea is that there's one "tertiary sector" which serves as a catch-all for various activities.) (The reference for this sentence is an article on "Silicon Valley of the East" which seems like it cold be cited lower down as well. It's a good article but could be bolstered by a more comprehensive economic study.)
Keep cutting down on wikilinks such as Malaysia and entrepôt (the latter, by the way, a fairly inadequate article which doesn't at present include George Town on its list of examples; maybe it should, though).
The Penang Monthly, according to its "About Us" page, is published by the Penang Institute, "the public policy think tank of the state government of Penang", and therefore may not represent the most independent viewpoint on George Town's economic prowess, or on other aspects of its greatness.
Fullcontact (the next footnote) is also not an ideal source.
I have no idea whether "as much as RM7 billion of Malaysia's tax income in 2014" represents a large proportion of Malaysia's tax income, a large proportion per capita, or ... ? Also the sources on this sentence are weak, coming from the context of editorials in a political dispute.
This last paragraph especially, but really this whole section, reads as very promotional.
Ideally this section (the opening) would be scrapped and rewritten using some more disinterested sources as a starting point.

> Commerce

This section is nice and factual. It could be renamed "Banking" or maybe "Finance" or "Financial sector" or something because that's what it really covers. (Maybe that means Commerce is getting left out.)

> Tourism

Is this the #2 economic sector? Some kind of ranking or quantitative distribution of economic activities would be good to include somewhere.
Not sure whether this list of mostly British notables really belongs. One can assume that many famous people have visited George Town. And the list isn't even in the source, which again is the Penang Monthly!
Tourism recommendations by LA Times, Lonely Planet and CNN? I'm not sure if such things are standard in articles about cities but I don't know so I won't say anything about it either way.
"gastronomic haven" -- nice
Suggest: "does not just rely on" -> "does not rely only on"
On the whole this section also seems a little long and on the promotional side, though such a tone is more expectable given the subject matter.

> Services

I see here you have some harder numbers on GDP breakdown (from Penang Monthly again but I don't know how many independent entities are compiling such data).
"has ~~also~~ marginally overtaken"
"startup industry" -- doesn't quite make sense -- can be easily rephrased in context.
Internet of Things reference seems buzzy and needs a better source describing how it's being promoted.
Last paragraph in first part is solid.
Medical tourism: OK. (But, "laid-back lifestyle"? Again sourced to Penang Monthly.)
Retail: source for 1st paragraph looks pretty solid but I don't see it saying that George Town had the biggest increase in shopping. In fact I don't see it saying much about George Town at all. List of malls could perhaps be abbreviated since it would presumably be desirable to cut article length somewhere. One could even imagine linking to Category:Shopping malls in Penang. In the last paragraph here, the first sentence is redundant and the second might belong at the top of this section, which in theory should focus on the economics of retail.

To be continued further.

Thanks! ;) Those are advices worth considering. I am trying my best too, though there seems to be limitations on the reliable sources of info, like the economics part.

Demographics

Done

Demographics>> Ethnicities

Done Stated that Bumiputeras include ethnic Malays and East Malaysian indigenous races. These races are specifically mentioned as sources indicate that they definitely reside within George Town. In the national context, the Bumiputeras encompass a much wider definition, including the natives of Peninsular Malaysia (known as Orang Asli).
Done In spite of Malaysia's ethnic policies that have effectively forced the Peranakans to identify themselves as Chinese, Peranakan culture still thrives in George Town to this day. Added a cite.
Done Added another cite about the King's Chinese label
Done corrected grammar

Demographics>> Languages

Done corrected grammar and edited the phrase about efforts being taken to promote Hokkien.

Economy

I am afraid I can't do much about the majority of economic cites coming from the Penang Monthly. The most reliable economic data for the State of Penang can only come from the Penang state government; there seems to be a lack of other independent sources about Penang's economy. Some data can be gleaned from the national Department of Statistics, but the national statistics are, well, national, and these do not provide more details about each state's economy.
Done Removed overlinking of Malaysia, GDP and entrepot
Done other tertiary sub-sectors
Done Removed fullcontact cite

Economy>>Commerce

Done Renamed into finance

Economy>>Tourism

The economic sectors listed here are not arranged according to any particular order. Aside from the employment data of the various sub-sectors, there is not much to indicate that any sub-sector has bigger contribution to Penang's economy than the other. Only that the services sector contributes nearly half of Penang's GDP and that this sector can be divided into several sub-sectors, such as medical tourism, retail, etc.
Done does not only rely on

Economy>>Services

Done has marginally overtaken
Done the city's startups

One of the cites does describe how Internet of Things is being promoted (via conferences involving professionals from overseas and funding from some larger companies).

Done Medical tourism : removed laid-back
Done Shifted the last sentence to the top, removed the redundant sentence. There is a corroboration between the increase in shopping malls as cited, with the actual launching dates of the shopping malls in George Town (considering the fact that many of the malls are launched after 2001). Nonetheless, I did shorten this retail section.

Vnonymous 01:47, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

... continuing ... groupuscule (talk) 10:35, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Architecture

The existence of a fork article, Architecture of Penang (which by the way is well-structured but short), creates an opportunity for off-loading some of the main article text on architecture to shorten the overall article length. The best reason for not doing this is that the Architecture section gives the opportunity for a lot of pictures, which everyone likes. If this is your thinking maybe a gallery would be good. Anyway I would recommend moving a lot of this and keeping a modified version of the first two paragraphs as an overview.
(Only now am I referring to Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline which appears to be this project's only guideline page for cities. You might want to check it out too, for ideas, not that it must be adhered to strictly. What did they say about architecture? Nothing.)
There's a whole header on UNESCO designating George Town a WHS; this doesn't need to be mentioned and linked in every other section. And take for example "the UNESCO zone is full of various Asian architectural styles". Is "the UNESCO zone" really the most normal way to talk about the historic downtown area on the city's east side?

Culture

Once again, the fork article (with lots of free space in it) is your friend, for absorbing material from this very long main article.
Just an aside: it's funny to me that the examples of European cuisine in the linked article are bread, pasta, a steak by itself, and potatoes. Maybe this is perfectly appropriate in term's of Europe's impact on world food.
Unnecessary to include full comments from CNN and Time on the food. In fact most of this section can be minimized or moved to Penang cuisine.
Performance arts section looks pretty good. The second link about Bangsawan goes nowhere.
Street art section is good. (On another aside, I'm surprised to see Spy vs. Spy as part of "World Heritage" but this definitely seems like a good illustration.)
Museums: looks good. But you don't have to mention the location of the museum ("at Farquhar Street"), especially not in the text if you already say it in the caption of the image next door.
Does Chingay parade belong in the festivals section rather than the performing arts section?
Festivals: A reference or two for the first few paragraphs would be alright. Also, regarding different religious traditions among the city's inhabitants, it might be good to include some information in the demographics section. This section is a little long and maybe could be moved to the Culture article and replaced with a more condensed overview.

Sports

You might be able to cut this first paragraph. But maybe not if there's no People from George town location where this information would go otherwise. Pictures are good.
A "physics-defying goal" :-/ sounds ... hyperbolic.
Probably don't need to keep a list of sports clubs in the article.
"sport events ~~include~~ including"

Education

Cut this section way down; combine material with List of schools in Penang and give a brief overview.
Libraries OK. (But you can shed more bytes in the overall article by cutting out the names of roads where things are located, in most cases.)
Language institutions could be mentioned in a sentence, if at all, rather than in their own section. Unless there is some special importance to them that I'm missing, in which case that can be described in prose rather than as a list.

Media

Section looks good overall.
Not sure why Time Out Penang (by the way, wikilinking Penang within the name is very awkward) gets two sentences while all others just get listed.
"Due to its well-preserved heritage cityscape" — delete unless there's a compelling source.

Transportation

Shrink this section down, especially the public tranportation subsection, using the forked articles.

OK this is almost done but I'm going to say "to be continued" one last time to avoid speeding through the end of the process.

To be continued.

Thanks for these suggestions. Now the article is a little shorter. :)

Architecture

Done Shortened this section as much as possible.

Culture

Done An aside. Chingay is a performance art, so it is more appropriate to place Chingay under that sub-section. Also Chingay parades can be held at any time of the year by the several troupes in George Town, so it won't be practical to place Chingay parades under festivals.

Sports

Done

Education

Done

Media

Done

Transport

Done

Vnonymous 11:00, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

conclusion groupuscule (talk) 04:38, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Transportation

First paragraph here reads a little like promotion and a little like original synthesis ... and it may not be needed.
"Development of George Town's streets and roads is an ongoing process that dates back to the early years of British rule. Outside the narrow streets of the city centre, more modern roads link [...]" -- true enough and not bad but perhaps could be improved with a little more direct description of the older versus newer road systems (concentric vs. grid; how are they paved; etc.)
Next paragraph (and following sentence) seems OK but it's a little difficult to read straight, for someone who's never been to the city, without a map. It's not obvious how this list of roads was selected. The Penang Bridge is mentioned twice.
I hate to say cut the Public transit section because there's a lot of good info. Maybe it doesn't need to include the fact (sourced to a bit of a one-liner) about Uber's successes in Penang. Again, you have Transport in Penang to fall back on. (Also is Uber usually considered public transportation?)
The public transport section says near the end: "The Penang Transport Master Plan envisages the following long-term solutions to counter George Town's increasing traffic congestion" -- wait, what increasing traffic congestion? If this is real it probably should have been mentioned above. (And then could probably be cut from here.)
Check through the rail proposals which follow to see how serious they are and if they could be consolidated, moved, or cut.
Airport: one of the busiest -> third busiest (?)
"~~This reflects Penang Island's role as a major tourism attraction and a manufacturing hub. Due to its proximity to the Bayan Lepas Free Industrial Zone,~~ [T]he airport plays a vital part in facilitating the transport of goods and products to and from the factories in Bayan Lepas."
Sea: cut down first paragraph, focus just on George Town terminals.

Utilities

Usage statistics on water & electric would be good to add.
Description of the water company sounds overenthusiastic. Maybe it's great; I dunno; the source isn't all that great.
Gas? or no.
I guess megabits per second may be a standard unit for internet access but, lacking conversion to kilobytes, maybe the megabits page should be linked? I'm not sure about this, maybe it would be too distracting. Just a thought.

International relations

These seem fine. Not really sure what to look for here. Maybe check to make sure these lists are complete.
What's a friendship city, as opposed to a sister city? Economic relations are more involved? This could be touched on.

City firsts

Consider deleting this entire section or moving it somewhere (Its own page? a new page on History of George Town?) if you can. It's so long; it's not a prose narrative; it's mostly unsourced; at least some of it is redundant; at least some of it is not that important. I really hate to say it because it represents a lot of work and information, but considering the length of the article I think it really shouldn't stay.