Wikipedia:Peer review/SCO v. IBM/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] SCO v. IBM
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I feel that the article is complete in its current form - it is unlikely to change for a long time due to the process of law, I'm just unsure where this article needs to go.
Thanks, outboxing (work • yada) 17:28, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: Phew - this is very detailed and obviously has had a lot of work put into it. Here are some suggestions for improvement:
- Lead needs to be expanded to be a summary of the whole article and not just one sentence - see WP:LEAD. The current sentence plus the current Summary section would actually be a decent lead section with a little tweaking.\
- SCO's claims sections - is there a reason these need to be bullet lists and not text paragraphs?
- Some awkwardness, such as Computerworld reported Chris Sontag of SCO as saying: (how about According to Computerworld, Chris Sontag of SCO said:? Having a fresh set of eyes do a copyedit would help.
- all Linux kernel developers have considered this to be far too restrictive, so none of them have signed it. needs a reference (extraordinary claims...).
- SCO's major claims have now been reported as relating to the following components of the Linux kernel - when is the "now" here? Better to say as of 2008 or whenver it actually was meant when "now" was written.
- Free software and open source community reaction section - needs lots more references. Open source advocates' arguments include: be specific - who holds all of these opinions? Why do they have to be bullet points and not text? Especially cite direct quotes such as SCO has often called themselves "The owner of the UNIX operating system." (and wouldn't it be SCO has often called itself..'?
- lending credence to the idea that the lawsuit's primary purpose is manipulation of SCO's stock price. SCO Group's CEO Darl McBride has been the subject of particular criticism, because of his extreme statements to the press. Whoa - needs cited or taken out - very POV if not slanderous.
- Similar problems to above throughout the rest of the article - lists instead of text, too many block quotes, under referenced, and POV.
- References come after punctuation, i.e. not On July 31, 2003, the Open Source Development Labs released a position paper on the ongoing conflict[27][28],...
- I thought See also was for links not already cited in the article?
- References for internet sources need to ALL give title, publisher, author if known, and date accessed.
- Can't you find any pictures? Maybe Linus Torvald? Surely there is a free picture of IBM headquarters or SCO's building or even the courthouse?
