Wikipedia:Peer review/List of Adobe Systems mergers and acquisitions/archive1

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for October 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to eventually bring it to WP:FLC. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 20:58, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per a request, here's a check of the sources:

Not a big deal, but the publisher in ref #2 should be "Encyclopedia Britannica".
Is http://www.macworld.com/article/39669/2004/09/adobeformat.html a reliable source?
Sources look good otherwise.

Done on Britannica. Macworld is Macworld, a magazine; it's definitely reliable. Gary King (talk) 00:25, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement. If you want more comments, please ask here.

The lead could be cleaned up a bit - for example, the sentence t was founded in 1982 by John Warnock and Charles Geschke, who established the company after leaving Xerox PARC to develop and sell the PostScript page description language.[1] could be a bit tighter as something like In 1982 John Warnock and Charles Geschke established the company, after leaving Xerox PARC to develop and sell the PostScript page description language.[1]
Since the article is about Adobe's acquisitions etc., I think these should be mentioned sooner in the lead, in the first paragraph in all cases. I would move the sentence During the company's 26-year lifetime, it has acquired 25 companies, purchased stakes in five companies, and divested six companies, with most of them being software companies. to the first paragraph and omit the other The company has made 25 acquisitions since its founding.
I would explain that the value of the acquisition etc. is not available in most cases in the lead.
I think the statements in the Notes need references.
Using another encyclopedia is generally not the best source / reference (tertiary sources vs secondary sources).
VHaving said that, the Encyclopedia Brittanica article says Apple Computers took a 15% stake in Adobe - should this (and any other companies taking stakes in Adobe or divesting themselves of such) be mentioned in the list?

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:08, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]