Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of acquisitions by Yahoo!

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted 16:14, 8 May 2008.

List of acquisitions by Yahoo![edit]

This list is based off of List of acquisitions by Google, a recently promoted WP:FL that I also nominated. Gary King (talk) 03:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Matthew

Comments

  • I think rather than a blank cell for the Value, it would be better with an emdash (—), just so people don't think the information was accidentally not included.
  • There's one date, September 2004, which is linked; I always thought it should be full dates only, but I don't see anything in the MOS:DATE to say whether it allows it or not.
  • I noticed some of the derived products are the same, but the column isn't listed. Is there a reason for this?
  • I would sort the value column too, though I get why it isn't with the missing values, so that goes either way for me.

That's it, I think! -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 06:33, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • What do you mean by the "column isn't listed"? Also, the rest are done. Gary King (talk) 07:16, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For previous lists, it had been suggested that it not be sortable because some rows had more than one item in that column. I'll make it sortable for this particular list because the items in this case are comparable. But for instance, the list for Apple have more than one item in Derived Products, so sort is not as suitable for that. Gary King (talk) 06:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think I was the one who kept asking for them unsorted, too! Ah well. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 05:23, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)
  • Please see any relevant comments I've made at the Apple Inc. FLC, such as sorting columns, USD representation, Bay area siting and linking.
  • "company founded on March 1, 1995. " - prove it. And actually that goes for Apple Inc. FLC too.
  • "which made co-founder Mark Cuban" not 100% clear he was co-founder of Yahoo! or the other company...
  • Kimo points to a dab page.
  • You use em-dashes here for "not known", on the Apple list I seem to recall it was blank cells. Be consistent.

That's it. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • All above is done. Sorting the Value column was tricky for some reason, and I finally managed to get it to sort properly. If I change the width or make (US$, in millions) smaller, then for some reason it stops sorting correctly. Gary King (talk) 21:02, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • The Value column doesn't sort properly.
  • This isn't a field about which I know very much. Your sources Search Engine Watch and GigaOM seem to be blogs; are these reliable sources? For instance your ref #34 cites a blog posting which links to an article elsewehere; would it be better to use the blogs to find the original sources and then cite the originals?
    • Those refs should be better now, using more reliable sources. Gary King (talk) 18:21, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:36, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose—Formatting, language, Criterion 2a.

  • Gary, what does "the respective company" mean? I see this here and in at least one other nomination above.
  • Please spell out "US$".
  • Do we really need to link "American"? And "United States", twice in four lines? Please link strategically to encourage readers to follow the high-value ones.
  • Remove "then".
  • Remove "US" from subsequent currency items (see MOS).
  • Commonwealth? Of Massatusetts? [sorry, it's perversely difficult to spell]
  • This seems to be one of a cascade of company-acquisition nominations. They seem to be churned out to a very similar formula in the lead. IMO, there's insufficient information about the company and its acquisitions in the lead. Thus, the list is ... rather boring. TONY (talk) 10:40, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Expanded. Should be better now. Gary King (talk) 18:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Following review comments needs to be addressed:

  • "Each acquisition is for the respective company in its entirety." - re-word sentence as it is difficult to understand. Possible alternative - All acquisitions is to 100% shares of the acquired company.
  • "The majority of the companies acquired by Yahoo! are based in the United States." - please be specific, list the number of non-US acquisitions vis-a-vis US acquisitions
  • Where the acquired company doesn't have a wiki page by itself, please avoid wiki-fying the name of the company and linking it to Yahoo. Instead let it be a non-wiki term or add atleast a stub level page for the original company. for eg: either add a wiki page for Net Controls or remove wiki link
  • Suggestion: There is no sub $1 million acquisition. Specifying the overall value makes it difficult to read. List amount by "US $ mn" instead of "US $"
    • I'd prefer to leave it as it is. It's just easier to read for each individual row. Gary King (talk) 18:57, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please address these comments and leave a note in my talk page. --Kalyan (talk) 02:00, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All done above Gary King (talk) 18:57, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support list for FL --Kalyan (talk) 07:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Marrio (talk) 15:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Although it might be good to add a descriptor like in the Electronic Arts acquisition list: "Each acquisition listed is for the entire company. The acquisition date listed is the date of the agreement between Electronic Arts (EA) and the subject of the acquisition. The value of each acquisition is listed in U.S. dollars, because EA is headquartered in the U.S. If the value of the acquisition is not listed, then it is undisclosed. If the EA service that is derived from the acquired company is known, then it is also listed." Marrio (talk) 16:55, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was the one that started that trend, and removed it in this article and will do so in subsequent articles because it was considered multiple times to be detrimental to the list's quality. Gary King (talk) 16:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see itt as detrimental - it provides context for the list, and is therefore useful to the reader. Marrio (talk) 14:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_acquisitions_by_Yahoo!&oldid=1088820501"