The first, third and forth paragraphs of the "Music and theatre" section are unsourced.
The "Literature" section needs some tidying up and expansion. Engels wasn't writing a novel, and it's not at all clear in what way Dickens was influenced by Gaskell. Generally seems a bit lightweight.
In Landmarks, "...although recently there has been an upsurge in interest for building more." and "...is an example of the new surge..." - what does that mean? It isn't backed up in any references. So they built a highrise, doesn't seem to be abnormal there. per Wikipedia:Peer review/Manchester.
The "Literature" section requires a citation template for two sources.
The "Nightlife" section is almost entirely unsourced.
The "Landmarks" section seems seriously short of references, and there's a large paragraph about Old Trafford, which isn't even in Manchester.
The bulk of the middle section of the "Media" section is unsourced.
The "Transport" section is almost entirely unsourced.
The first paragraph of the "Sports" section is entirely unsourced.
The "Twin cities and consulates" is entirely unsourced.
The World war II section starts off by saying that Manchester was a centre of/was involved in heavy industrial construction. But this isn't mentioned in the Industrial Revolution section, from which a reader would suppose that all Manchester made was textiles.
Check the figures in the Demographic section for Manchester City the percentage of people of Asian background is 9.1% and the number of people who belong to the Muslim faith also equals 9.1%, however there is also a category for Hindu's which is 0.7%, surely some, if not all those classified as Hindu should be included in the figure for people from an Asian background.
