The result was: promoted by
Allen3
talk 18:23, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
DYK toolbox |
---|
Created by Cunard ( talk). Self-nominated at 05:19, 4 September 2015 (UTC).
The article is based primarily on factual statements rather than opinions or assertions– an article based primarily on factual statements is a good thing, not a bad thing. An article based on opinions or assertions would not be a neutral article.
I think that the level of detail given to the funding is too great, and not enough focus is given to the actual product, but this is beyond the scope of the DYK review.
– the sources give the most weight to the funding, so per
Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Due and undue weight this is the proper weight in the article. I agree that the article certainly can be expanded further though that is outside the scope of the DYK review.
I feel that the hook is jargony and feels promotional; I'm not sure if a prediction from a single source is appropriate here, even if it is attributed in-hook. I'd like to see more suggestions for hooks.
– I think the hook fact is interesting, causing readers to wonder why a company is referred to as a
unicorn. Jargon that "hooks" the readers' attention is fine in a DYK hook. I do not think stating the fact that it is predicted to become a unicorn is promotional.
A possible alternative hook:
ALT1: ... that Greenhouse Software, which provides recruiting software for technology companies including Airbnb, Snapchat, and Uber, has expanded from 45 to 125 employees in eight months?
The result was: promoted by
Allen3
talk 18:23, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
DYK toolbox |
---|
Created by Cunard ( talk). Self-nominated at 05:19, 4 September 2015 (UTC).
The article is based primarily on factual statements rather than opinions or assertions– an article based primarily on factual statements is a good thing, not a bad thing. An article based on opinions or assertions would not be a neutral article.
I think that the level of detail given to the funding is too great, and not enough focus is given to the actual product, but this is beyond the scope of the DYK review.
– the sources give the most weight to the funding, so per
Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Due and undue weight this is the proper weight in the article. I agree that the article certainly can be expanded further though that is outside the scope of the DYK review.
I feel that the hook is jargony and feels promotional; I'm not sure if a prediction from a single source is appropriate here, even if it is attributed in-hook. I'd like to see more suggestions for hooks.
– I think the hook fact is interesting, causing readers to wonder why a company is referred to as a
unicorn. Jargon that "hooks" the readers' attention is fine in a DYK hook. I do not think stating the fact that it is predicted to become a unicorn is promotional.
A possible alternative hook:
ALT1: ... that Greenhouse Software, which provides recruiting software for technology companies including Airbnb, Snapchat, and Uber, has expanded from 45 to 125 employees in eight months?