Talk:James Pascoe Group/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: CorporateM (talk · contribs) 05:25, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do this review. CorporateM (Talk) 05:25, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to pass the article at this time, but I hope I provided some feedback that may lead to a strong second nomination in the future. CorporateM (Talk) 05:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

The lead should both define the subject and summarize the article, but currently it feels like it only defines it, because there is no corporate history, controversies, etc. For example, most company pages should probably include the foundation date in the Lede.CorporateM (Talk) 05:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox: The Key People section has a name, Anne Norman, with no titleCorporateM (Talk) 05:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox: Do we need that many people listed?CorporateM (Talk) 05:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox: Just checking if you have looked through their website to find an updated/accurate employee count CorporateM (Talk) 05:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History

~~"iconic"~~ - promotion CorporateM (Talk) 05:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Most of this section should go under an "Activities" or similar section, rather than history CorporateM (Talk) 05:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
External links are not allowed in the body of the article CorporateM (Talk) 05:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The section sounds promotional, but would be acceptable if it had strong sources. However, when I look at this source for example, it does not appear to support the article text or mention the company at all. CorporateM (Talk) 05:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relevance

This article is on "James Pascoe Group" but it includes a lot of off-topic information, such as bios on its executives and dedicated sections about individual companies. Probably a list of companies with a summary would be best. The execs can have their own article if they are notable enough for one.CorporateM (Talk) 05:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Misc

Needs red links and external links taken out throughout. CorporateM (Talk) 05:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Everything in the article should have a source, but just looking at the Farmers section as an example, there are a couple sentences at the end of each paragraph on the bottom half with no citations. CorporateM (Talk) 05:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]