User talk:CorporateM/Goodnight

Some suggestions
The footnotes aren't consistently formatted. I like WP:CITE, which is the format that has been used for many/most footnotes, but should be for used consistently for all footnotes.

"Further reading" is generally to be avoided, by which I mean that if it's possible to use something in that section for a footnote, that is much preferable to having it in the "Further reading" section. (I think of this section as the place to put offline sources where (a) an editor doesn't have time or inclination to use that source, and/or (b) an editor can't get at the source, but thinks it's important.)

I suggest the "Philanthropy" section be merged into "Personal life" (more commonly "Personal", I think).

The is some good information in the SAS Institute article that I think should go into this one, even though there will obviously be redundancy. Specifically, the first two sections (history) and the first two paragraphs of the "Business" section are important for giving a sense of what Goodnight has done and how his role has changed over the years. The couple of sentences about a flat organization (27 people reporting directly to him) are also worth duplicating. (And the "SAS Institute" section of this article should have this at the beginning:)

-- John Broughton (♫♫) 23:29, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much! I implemented all your feedback, save the Further Reading, because the two remaining are both interviews that may not serve well as sources.


 * I suspect the SAS section may be expanded in a GA review, but I'm sensitive to it already sounding promotional; given the source material it's difficult to write it any other way.


 * User:CorporateM 05:31, 18 December 2012 (UTC)