Talk:Apple Inc. and unions/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:32, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 14:48, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Links

Prose

Lede

Like many large technology companies, Apple Inc. has limited recognition of worker organizations. - this feels quite weighted. Could we at least comment on Apple and how many people they employ first? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:41, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

made it less weighted. I kept the employee count/composition inside the industrial composition section, since that flows immediately next still ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:59, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hitting a trillion dollar capital valuation - being valued over $1 trillion in 2018. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:41, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lede is very short and doesn't really cover much that happens in the rest of the article. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:41, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In progress ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:59, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

General

Any idea why Brazil is before China when China has more influence? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now sorted United States, China, Brazil with remaining countries sorted alphabetically, am open for other specific ordering suggestions ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:04, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now all countries are alphabetically sorted. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In 2012, by the time Foxconn opened a second Brazilian factory - I think we are missing some background about when Apple first opened in Brazil. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done I clarified the first was non Apple related, and that in 2012 is when Apple entered Brazil thru Foxconn ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox in the body isn't suitable. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done there is no infobox anymore. Just a top level image ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there a main article template half way through a section? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've read through the China part - I'm a bit confused how this all relates to Apple. I get these are factories that are creating bits for Apple, but most of the issues seem to be surrounding the factory owner. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have trimmed this significantly and mainly try highlight that Foxconn is largest assembler for Apple, and that vast majority of their employees work on Apple products. The relation between to the two is complex, but the working conditions/standards and liability is clearly a tug and pull between Foxconn and Apple. Now that Foxconn and unions exists, it's easier for me to tease what might belong in what, though there's an overlap for sure. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:04, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the smaller sections could easily be merged. We don't need a section for a single paragraph. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"It's time to Think Different" a play on Apple's slogan "Think Different".[ - we've already mentioned this slogan a section above. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

#AppleToo is ... - so, at this point we have said it's a website, and now we are putting in Twitter handles without explaination. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Explained its shift to Apple Together, and trimmed down the highly anecdotal/individual stories about its founders. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

open letter to Cook - who? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done I provide his title, e.g. CEO Cook ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

stated "This is a - this happens a lot in the article. The quote should follow the grammar of the article, so in this case, no capital letter. Check throughout. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

1. AppleToo movement using the phrase "From #AppleToo to Apple Together",[60] and the group has used the tagline "Think Equitable", a play on Apple's slogan "Think - I feel like we've already said this a few times. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are all these images really fair use? We generally need significant commentary of the contents of a photo to have more than one non-free image in a page. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to remove more of the photos ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:04, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Removed all fair use images and replaced it with one Scholars and Students Against Misbehaviour freely licensed image ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Apple Workers Union. - bold isn't suitable. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Affiliated with GMB Union under the banner of Apple Retail Workers Union. John Slaven of GMB stated that "These workers have shown tremendous courage and resilience to organise themselves. Apple speak the language of social justice but in practice it is the same story of low pay, unfair shift patterns and lack of respect. These workers realise they need an independent voice and that can only come through unionisation". - all uncited. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done I removed quote and focused on facts. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Review meta comments

I'll begin the review as soon as I can! If you fancy returning the favour, I have a list of nominations for review at WP:GAN and WP:FAC, respectively. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these if you get time. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:48, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shushugah did you have any responses to this? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:58, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shushugah, have you got time to take a look at this? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:14, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski thank you for the patient pings! A bunch of new sources were added by others, that I wanted to verify/investigate, and then real life events got in the way but I am back. I will commit to completing the review/content by December 20th. You've been only but generous with your time, so let me know if that works for you, absolutely no rush on my end for your final review. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 22:40, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't mind waiting Shushugah, but I just want to know it is being worked on. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:19, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shushugah - might need to prod this one on you. I don't like closing reviews this close to being completed, but there's still some outstanding items to address. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:56, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Lee Vilenski for the nudge. I will finish this today. As I see it; the following issues remain:

~~Lede in article can be expanded. Also also within United States section.~~

~~United Kingdom needs a rewrite and to be less SYNTH/PROMO of GMB.~~

~~Order of sections. Simplest could be just alphabetical. I personally leaned towards keeping USA/China on top, but open to keeping it purely Alphabetical. The other sections are small anyways.~~

Do you think the Foxconn/other manufacturer aspect is more weighted/clear now? And what do you think of the sole remaining image now? I removed the fair use logo/images. What other outstanding issues remain? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:32, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Lee Vilenski, I believe I have addressed all of your points, and did a thorough review of all sources, checked for more relevant/updated information and updated where appropriate, particularly in the USA section. Let me know if anything else is needed. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.