Talk:Big Market Acquisitions - Microsoft

Length

The article seems like it is missing quite a bit of the elements there. This leads to a lack of words towards the 3000 word counts. The article’s length is around 300 words. There seems to be a lot of open opportunities for the author to add more elements to the article and work towards the goal of 3000 words.

Structure

There is an opening paragraph that summarizes the topic. The opening paragraph does a good job in explaining the history and the growth of the Microsoft company. The body of the article is in one or more sections. More specifically, the article is split into 5 different sections. There is a reference listed on the bottom of the article. However, it does not seem like the reference is linked to anything within the article, making it hard to locate what statement is being backed up by the reference. The opening paragraph really touched on the history of the Microsoft company, but not a lot on the specific topic of Big market acquisitions. The author can probably pinpoint a little more towards the topic and put the opening paragraph in a separate section.

Clarity

The issues that the author is talking about seem to be addressing the opinions from various corporate, government, and consumer points of view on the topic of big market acquisitions. It also contains a section on the response to ethical concerns. It seems clear on what the author is aiming towards. But currently, there is not enough writing to backup all the ethical issues talked about in the article. The section on Government opinion is stated pretty clearly that the government is against the big market acquisition which results in the corporation splitting into two pieces after losing a US antitrust action. The author can explain a little more on why having a big company size and market domination is not good for the general public.

Objective reporting

The article reporting on the controversies seems to be objective. The author did not state any personal opinions. The author reports the controversies on multiple perspectives such as from corporate, government and consumer. The statement does not seem to be backed up by references which is definitely something that the author can try to work on. The author does not seem to be arguing for anything. The author described the action from the government and reported the history of the company in a very objective manner.