Talk:Kane/Miller/GA1

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

Reviewer: Grandiose (talk · contribs) 10:58, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Comments

 * Article is very short. There must be a lot more to say about how many personnel the company has, where they are, what volume of publishing it does, more about its role as part of EDC, commentary on the success or failures of the company by outside sources.
 * A lot of the article is to self-published sources. More emphasis is needed on third-party sources.
 * Notability is troublesome. I shan't do you the slight of nominating the article for deletion, but someone else might. There's nothing to separate this company from any other publisher contained in the article. Maybe enlarged there would be.
 * Lead is particularly short and doesn't really summarise the article.
 * Image is OK.
 * I think the page has to be moved, the slash messes up some of our breadcrumbs and things. I don't know exactly, I'd ask at the WP:Help Desk about this.
 * These are big issues the article has to deal with, so I'm failing the article without prejudice to a future nomination. What's here is good, but it's not up to Good Article standard yet in terms of breadth of coverage. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 10:58, 15 June 2012 (UTC)