Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:United States companies
The following discussion comes from Wikipedia:Categories for deletion. This is an archive of the discussion only; please do not edit this page. -Kbdank71 17:39, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Delete: 4 Keep: 1 Consensus is to delete. -Kbdank71 17:45, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Obsoleted by Category:Companies of the United States. Bryan 07:13, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- note: the category proposed for deletion is already empty
- Oppose. I prefer the more concise version. Maurreen 07:53, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Empty. Category names are better consistent than concise. There are many other "X companies of the United States" categories. --A D Monroe III 12:22, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The original category links to list of United States companies via a template. The new category does not. Why is the new category better? --ssd 16:12, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Please, which one is the "original" in User:Ssd's comment? Page moves include moving history, confusing the issue. --A D Monroe III 23:18, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Agreement with A D Monroe.
- on a related note, though, how are we defining the nationality in this case? Is it by country of incorporation, for instance? (maybe there is a WikiProject that addresses this, I don't know) My feeling is that multinationals/transnationals might be good to go into a separate primary category (note that Category:International joint-venture companies is empty except for one subcategory) and there be another class of categories named something like Category:Companies with capital investment in (country) or Category:Companies operating in (country), the latter not synonymous to "selling goods in". Also, companies that have no or a slim minority stake in bricks and mortar, i.e. internet companies, how should those be categorized? Let me know if I should put these thoughts in another place and I'll copy them there. Regards, Courtland 18:15, 2005 Mar 5 (UTC)
- No, hardly anyone would use those either I shouldn't think. Some companies operate in a hundred or more countries. Should they me in all of them? Parent companies should just be under the country they are headquartered in. If people want to write separate articles about "Ford Germany" or whatever that would be fine. Wincoote 18:37, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, there is no defined solution possible, given the modern Global Economy. I worked for a company in the U.S. that was owned by a French company, but was incorporated in the Caribbean for tax reasons, but had most of their employees manufacturing in China, except for their exempt employees who technically worked for a completely different company to get benefits at a larger group rate. What nation to list it as is a judgement call. --A D Monroe III 15:35, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- No, hardly anyone would use those either I shouldn't think. Some companies operate in a hundred or more countries. Should they me in all of them? Parent companies should just be under the country they are headquartered in. If people want to write separate articles about "Ford Germany" or whatever that would be fine. Wincoote 18:37, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)