Aullbw
I would recommend taking a look at Microsoft for an example of how to write a good article on a corporation. The important difference is that the Microsoft article places the information into context--it describes what Microsoft did that was important, why it was important, and what people said about it. If the Microsoft article were written like the DAXCON article it'd read something like:
"Microsoft is a US-based company that produces software. Microsoft produces several kinds of software: office software, operating systems, internet software, and games. Microsoft makes office software, which might be used in an office. It works hard to remove all bugs. Microsoft produces operating systems, which are vital for computer. Microsoft produces internet software which can be used on networks; specifically, web browsers, email software, and more. Microsoft also makes games for entertainment, such as MS Flight Simulator."
You see that the information is true, but gives no indication of why it is important, or how it fits into history. If the article is complimentary of the subject, this also seems like an advertisement. If it were negative, it would seem like an attack. So, it is important to provide information (and sources) to explain why we should have an article, and what the corporation did that was noted by others. --Sopoforic 14:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry for the late response. As for the article: you don't seem to have addressed any of my concerns. You tightened up the language, but didn't provide any context whatsoever since I last looked at it. Example: you mention that Daxcon performs Design Engineering; you should provide information about why we should care. Such information would (probably) be cited in the form of a news article explaining how this was important. If, having added some context, you'd like for me to look at the article again, then leave me a note and I'll do so. --Sopoforic 07:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)