Talk:Canon NoteJet

Canon NoteJet was nominated as a Engineering and technology good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 27, 2021). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Canon NoteJet/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 03:52, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to quick-fail this one. It's just nowhere near complete. For instance, there's way more that could be said about the features than just on sentence. Anything new to this model of printer, for instance? Or what were the various components of this printer? What did it allow the user to do?

Or for history. What was the design process of this? Who were the engineers who helped design it, and what was the motivation for designing this printer? What marketing activities were done?

The different models are way too short, we aren't given enough information about these models, and what defines them.

Why was it discontinued? We aren't really told at all.

Also, there's a couple spots with no citations, such as "The Canon BN200 is an upgrade from the BN22. It has an active matrix 800x600 LCD." or "The NoteJet branding was not used in Europe.", as pretty much everything will need to be cited for GA level.

Sorry, but this is just nowhere near WP:GACR #3a. I'm going to have to fail this, as it needs lots of expansion. Hog Farm _Talk 04:21, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WHY weren’t/aren’t these being improved on!?

Think about how many low-income homes or individuals could benefit from something like this. People who rent rooms and perhaps don’t have the space or finances for a separate printer or close & convenient access to a place to have simple documents printed out. I know that both laptops and printers have each become increasingly more affordable however for those limited by space economy (think the ever growing tiny house movement) this could be something that’s primed for a revival? What about young students working from home ever-so mire often since the pandemic, being able to avail themselves of simple printing out of essays and assignments? Without having to bother parents, or school districts with having to be sure all students have a printer in ADDITION to assuring they have computer access. I think this piece may have just been ahead of its time! 2600:1700:BB40:21D0:28C8:A156:6E99:C51A (talk) 04:57, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore my previous “contribution”

I was mistaken in thinking this “Talk”/“Add discussion” was for actual informal discussion 😅😞. That being said, my previous sentiments still stand but do not merit being audited (or edited;) or viewed in respect to editing of this article. I have, at least, expanded my knowledge and understanding of Wikipedia’s inner workings. So, there’s that. Thank you and enjoy the laugh whom ever I have (hopefully) provided one to! 2600:1700:BB40:21D0:28C8:A156:6E99:C51A (talk) 05:06, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]