Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of acquisitions by Cisco Systems

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 13:17, 6 May 2008.

List of acquisitions by Cisco Systems

Nominating this because I believe it should be a WP:FL. Gary King (talk) 07:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support all my concerns from other reviews have been addressed admirably here. Good stuff Gary. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Crzy cheetah

Comment You are basically using one source. All of your references are from the Cisco's website. Could you use reports from news agencies on some of the info?--Crzy cheetah 19:24, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look around, but this is based off of the company's own press releases because it's their own acquisitions. It's like, if the Academy Awards gave an award to someone and announced it, then everyone would also just 'copy' that information; the bottom line is that there is only one source for that because they are the only ones who control the recipients. The same goes with this list. Gary King (talk) 19:28, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You example is out of place here. I am not saying you should remove those sources, all I am asking is to add independent sources, as well. Taking all info from just one website is WP:POV. I'd like to know what the acquired companies' websites say? You know, the other side is also important. --Crzy cheetah 19:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've added some refs; will add more to the other items. Gary King (talk) 20:01, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ The refs are fine, but the Value column doesn't sort properly.--Crzy cheetah 22:32, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is due to a bug with the {{nts}} template... see Template talk:Sort#nts not sorting values above 10million properly Tompw (talk) (review) 22:55, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's weird, then that column should have an unsortable class. I just don't see how useful it is to sort a column that can't be sorted properly.--Crzy cheetah 23:11, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done Gary King (talk) 23:15, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, after thinking about it, wouldn't it be better if you stated in the header that the values are in thousands and remove the last three zeroes? This way, there are no numbers above 10 million and the column will sort properly. Just a suggestion.--Crzy cheetah 23:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've thought of that and as I said before, I prefer to keep the full values in there. It just makes more sense for people who just look at a row without looking at the headers. I'm going to leave it as it is. Gary King (talk) 23:29, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support Hopefully that bug is going to be fixed at Template talk:Sort#nts not sorting values above 10million properly, other than that, this list is very much useful.--Crzy cheetah 23:54, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Could you add a note to the effect that Crescendo was Cisco's first aqusitions (ref #3 mentions this, so you have a source). The reason is that it looks odd that the company seven years not buying anything, and then buying two or three companies per year. Once this is supported, this will have my support. Tompw (talk) (review) 13:20, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have expanded the lead to add this information. Please take a look at it. Gary King (talk) 17:50, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support Quick work :-) Tompw (talk) (review) 20:40, 4 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.