Talk:Mutianyu

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

China Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article needs a map. Please work with the Maps workgroup to create and add a map to this article. Once the requested map is added, remove the map-needed parameter. Military history: Fortifications / Asian / Chinese This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Fortifications task force Asian military history task force Chinese military history task force

I have a question about this sentence in the article- Due to its proximity to the Jiankou Great Wall, the Mutianyu-Jiankou trail is becoming one of the most popular Great Wall hikes. As Jiankou is in a state of disrepair, this hike combines the preserved condition of Jiankou's Great Wall with the classic restorative brickwork of Mutianyu. The sentence mentions that Jiankou is in a state of disrepair and then calls it preserved event though that section has never been restored. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.69.185 (talk) 19:31, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think the point was that the stones were from the Ming instead of newly reconstructed material from the last 50 years. _dk (talk) 19:46, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]