Talk:Cosmic Couriers

Quality scale rating
I'm not sure if the person who graded this as "stub-class" looked beyond the length of the article and number of references, but the fact of the matter is this label existed for at most 2 years, was the smallest of three similar labels run by the same person (Kaiser) in the same time period (Ohr, Pilz), and there simply exists very little printed (or otherwise reference-worthy) material to source from.

We've summed up the brief life of the label and given a complete list of its releases along with internal and external links. I don't think this fits under the definition of stub-class:

As to readers' experience: Provides very little meaningful content; may be little more than a dictionary definition. and editing suggestions: ''Any editing or additional material can be helpful. The provision of meaningful content should be a priority.''

I honestly think this deserves a B grade, but I'll tread lightly and place a C as I'm still quite new to editing. However, this being a topic of interest to me, I think the work of the editors of this page should be more attentively graded.

If you think this is incorrect or I've made a mistake please let me know. Pfoot (talk) 11:10, 25 February 2012 (UTC)