Talk:IBM and unions/GA2

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Mokadoshi (talk · contribs) 05:28, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

Prose

 * IBM has a strong corporate culture that promotes strong employee identification to the company, individual relations between employees and their direct manager. I'm having trouble understanding what this means. Is there a way to reword this to make this clearer? Mokadoshi (talk) 21:02, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I think this is good. Mokadoshi (talk) 03:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Lead

 * In general, significant information should not only appear in the lead. Anonymous feedback from employees allowed management to address grievances early on. If management became aware of unionization drives, investigatory teams were formed to discourage unionization by exploring alternatives exists in the lead but I'm not seeing corresponding information below in the article. In its current state, this is undue weight. See MOS:LEADREL for more information. P.S., I think you did a good job with this in Apple and unions if you want to compare the two. Mokadoshi (talk) 21:02, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Addressed by moving out of the lead. Mokadoshi (talk) 03:05, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Focused

 * In a 2014 research study conducted by the European Trade Union Institute on transnational companies across 23 European Union (EU) states, IBM was among the 5 largest companies (employee wise) in Ireland in the electronics and manufacturing sector. IBM was also the top 5 largest companies (employee wise) in 12 EU states in the ICT sector. What does this have to do with unions? Sorry if the question is dumb but I'm trying to make sure we're not going on unrelated tangents here. Mokadoshi (talk) 21:02, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Shushugah I don't see a response here about this question. Why does saying that IBM is a large company in EU have anything to do with its relationship to unions? As a comparison, the next few sentences are about how employees ranked IBM above average in its recognition of unions, which is clearly relevant. Mokadoshi (talk) 03:11, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Discussion

 * @Mokadoshi thank you for your thorough review, I hope to get to it either today or Sunday. Finding time right before the holidays has been tricky for me, but I already started going through the dead/pay-walled links, to see if I can find open-access equivalent and will respond to your other comments. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:55, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi, any update? Mokadoshi (talk) 04:40, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Mokadoshi Thank you for your patience, I believe I have addressed all the issues now. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Looks mostly good but I've pointed out a couple things missed. Thanks, Mokadoshi (talk) 03:36, 14 April 2024 (UTC)