Talk:Scanline VFX

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

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

It's got a more NPOV now. If you can cite references like newspaper articles, notable magazines that have written an article about their work, or a credit from poseidon, that would be great. I haven't taken the tag down for NPOV because I'd like someone new to check it besides me as well, just in case there's more to be done in that way. hope it helps Resonanteye 09:05, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just did it and I like it that way. So, took out the commercial tag.
Got rid of the " From the beginning, Scanline has specialized in internal software development". Obviously a 130 member software company is doing more than scanning and services.
Made sense of the titles (history, etc..).Looks pretty good now.
Still remains the lack of reference: so put the referenceless tag next to the claim; In fact, I edited it to really attract the eye.

Dilane 05:07, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]