Tapad has been listed as one of the
Social sciences and society good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: September 26, 2014. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
I accepted / moved this from wp:afc just now Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 12:57, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Per the "connected contributor" tag up top, I have a COI with Tapad. I'm going to be using this space as a storage pen for new sources that come out. Anyone is welcome to cross off ones that do not have anything useful, incorporate useful ones, etc. and I'll circle back every once in a while when the article has gotten to a point of being out-of-date. CorporateM ( Talk) 18:53, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Bentvfan54321 ( talk · contribs) 12:21, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
This looks like a nice, short article that has plenty of references and is generally well-written. I'll take this review. -- Bentvfan54321 ( talk) 12:21, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
The lead section looks good; its length is adequate given the length of the article.
Overall, everything looks great, there are just a few minor prose and references issues to be worked out. I see you are busy with Yelp right now, so I'll give you plenty of time to fix these minor problems. Nice work, -- Bentvfan54321 ( talk) 15:04, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
A couple of small updates I wanted to suggest based on new sources that have emerged since the Good Article review a few months ago:
CorporateM ( Talk) 16:53, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Storing some sources here:
References
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
It's been almost eight months since I proposed some updates to the article. Since then the company has raised new funding, introduced new products and new sources have been published. I wanted to suggest a few updates to keep the article up-to-date. I've placed the proposed additions in bold red text at Talk:Tapad/draft to try to make it as easy as possible to review. CorporateM ( Talk) 05:22, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Tapad has been listed as one of the
Social sciences and society good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: September 26, 2014. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
I accepted / moved this from wp:afc just now Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 12:57, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Per the "connected contributor" tag up top, I have a COI with Tapad. I'm going to be using this space as a storage pen for new sources that come out. Anyone is welcome to cross off ones that do not have anything useful, incorporate useful ones, etc. and I'll circle back every once in a while when the article has gotten to a point of being out-of-date. CorporateM ( Talk) 18:53, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Bentvfan54321 ( talk · contribs) 12:21, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
This looks like a nice, short article that has plenty of references and is generally well-written. I'll take this review. -- Bentvfan54321 ( talk) 12:21, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
The lead section looks good; its length is adequate given the length of the article.
Overall, everything looks great, there are just a few minor prose and references issues to be worked out. I see you are busy with Yelp right now, so I'll give you plenty of time to fix these minor problems. Nice work, -- Bentvfan54321 ( talk) 15:04, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
A couple of small updates I wanted to suggest based on new sources that have emerged since the Good Article review a few months ago:
CorporateM ( Talk) 16:53, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Storing some sources here:
References
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
It's been almost eight months since I proposed some updates to the article. Since then the company has raised new funding, introduced new products and new sources have been published. I wanted to suggest a few updates to keep the article up-to-date. I've placed the proposed additions in bold red text at Talk:Tapad/draft to try to make it as easy as possible to review. CorporateM ( Talk) 05:22, 19 August 2015 (UTC)