This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
The validity of TechCrunch as a RS has been brought up repeatedly at RSN, and the advice of several respected editors seems salient here. Refer to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 221#Are news articles written by TechCrunch staff considered RS?. There is no clear consensus to rule TechCrunch out automatically, but as it isn't rock solid, it should not be used in a broad overview such as this. Especially when there are concerns as to how specific events in the timeline are chosen. - Bri (talk) 18:16, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original orplagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:35, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]