Wikipedia:Peer review/Emerald Cloud Lab/archive1

Emerald Cloud Lab

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.

Hey there! This is the first article I've created, and I'm hoping to get some discussion on how I can best structure it. I had a little trouble finding best practices for articles on businesses/startups, so I'd be curious about that. I'd also be interested in some feedback on general flow. Thank you very much for your time!

Thanks, Jlevi (talk) 21:23, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by PotentPotables

Hi Jlevi, well done on successfully creating your first article! I've done a basic copyedit (mainly punctuation and spacing) on the article, and have a few comments on how you could improve it (I'm not too science-y, so bear with me):

There are general tense issues which need to be sorted out like "they say that they" and " During this time, they say,". Remove all the "they say".

My hope here is to properly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Attribution those statements to the founders. It seems reasonable to do so, as the founder of a company may (or may not) overly narrativize or rosily present the past. Is there a better way to make this attribution clear here? Is there a specific Wikipedia style guide regarding this? To the best of my knowledge, this is not a "tense issue" in most contexts, but I could certainly see it being a problem from the perspective of encyclopedic style preferences. Jlevi (talk) 21:48, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The closest thing I can find is WP:SUBSTANTIATE, but even that doesn't really seem to discuss this matter too much because it's not really bias. Maybe instead of the "During this time, they say, they experienced problems with laboratory hardware and software [...]" lines, you could change it to something like "In order to overcome issues with disparate manufacturers and rudimentary software, they wrote [etc, etc]". This might work make it sound a bit "cleaner", so see how it goes, and Wikipedia:Be bold! PotentPotables (talk) 23:57, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DoneJlevi (talk) 02:41, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Forbes source [1] does not seem to be reliable, as it comes from a Forbes contributor and not staff (per WP:RSPSOURCES). If you can find a reliable source to back the "first such company" claim, then add that in.

Sounds fair. I'll move this out when I (soon) restructure the article. Jlevi (talk) 21:48, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Jlevi (talk) 02:45, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

the phrase "on Emerald Drive, a suburb of Philadelphia" should be "on Emerald Drive, in the Philadelphia suburbs", per the source. The current phrase reads as if E Drive is the suburb.

Good catch. Done. Jlevi (talk) 21:48, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Change all examples of "DJ" into "D.J." per MOS:INITIALS and source.

Done Jlevi (talk) 21:48, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps split the "History" section into subsections? One section explaining the background of the creators (using the BBerg source) – education, previous career, etc.. – then another detailing the actual history of the company.
Add a "products/services" section to detail what the company actually offers (look at Google#Products and services for some inspiration).
Perhaps add a "financing" section too detailing their funding, and an "Impact" section like that on Facebook explaining how they have been used in research, etc.

If you can find any more reliable sources, then that's always an advantage, and I'm sure they'll fit in well with the sections above. Good luck, keep editing! PotentPotables (talk) 01:29, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]