&raw T/&raw mut T aren't pointer types, they're syntax for creating *const T/*mut T.
These aren't included in the article because they are not borrow checked, but you're right that if someone was trying to cover 100% of pointer types in Rust, raw pointers would be missing.
If we start creating more `&... T` ptr types I wonder if a future edition changes `*const T` to `&raw T` for consistency...