Jump to content

Talk:List of oldest companies

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Auto98uk (talk | contribs) at 21:20, 10 December 2012 (→Royal Mint). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconCompanies List‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
ListThis article has been rated as List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Companies To-do:
Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

suzuki

2 listed, same link — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.95.198.144 (talk) 20:45, 25 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Mint

How is the Royal Mint not a government organisation? --Helenalex (talk) 22:41, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Nikthestunned 08:18, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because it isn't? The Royal Mint is a private company with a government contract. Now, that private companys shares are 100% owned by the treasury, but that does not make it a government organisation. Previously it was on eof many mints which were all private. If the "done" refers to removing it, I think that needs reverting. Auto98uk (talk) 13:37, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I went off the current status in the article for the company itself - if this is out of date then feel free to update and this page will be updated accordingly. As is it's a "Government-owned company" - which makes it ineligible for this list. Nikthestunned 15:03, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a list of what is eligible - the royal mint treads a line where it is a private company, but the shares are owned by the government - legally speaking this doesn't make it a government organisation, but it is a difficult one to interpret. Auto98uk (talk) 21:20, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Minoya

This source from TDB mentions a company called Minoya in Inashiki, founded 1626 and doing "Retail liquor". However, without knowing Japanese that's all you get, because the word "Minoya" is too generic, and "Minoya Inashiki" doesn't yield anything useful. Hence it's hard to know what the company actually does and what a less generic name would be, so I haven't added it to the list. --OpenFuture (talk) 08:27, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I feel this page should have an edit notice

Though I need some help with the wording... Was thinking something along the lines of:

Anyone have any thoughts / ideas / objections? Nikthestunned 16:09, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You mean on the article page itself? If so, is there a precedent for such a notice? I edit a lot of list articles where people routinely add non-notable and/or unsourced entries, and none of them contain any such notice. The pages are just watchlisted by a lot of experienced editors who revert such additions within a few hours. —Psychonaut (talk) 16:58, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That would be an inappropriate tag to add, as tags are meant to be fixable so they can ultimately be removed. The tag you are suggesting would be a permanent fixture. SilverserenC 22:41, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It could be added as a comment in the source, though. Not sure it's very useful. --OpenFuture (talk) 22:43, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No comments on whether it's needed or not, but I don't believe any of these methods of displaying an edit notice is what Nikthestoned is talking about. See WP:EDNO. For an example of a working edit notice, try editing WP:ANI and look at the top of the screen. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 23:30, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see. In that case, I'm all for it, provided there's a precedent for this sort of notice in article space. I've only ever seen them on user and project pages. —Psychonaut (talk) 07:42, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, sorry I wasn't more clear - I was talking about what Jauerback identified! I've seen this on many pages, including: religious pages; pages concerning sex, BLP pages; and even on some other lists. Just seemed to be the best option as it's not visible to the casual reader and more visible to would-be editors, unlike talk page messages or revert-comments. Nikthestunned 08:26, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Should entry #1 (Kongō Gumi) be removed since it's no longer in operation?

If I've interpreted this list correctly, it is for companies that are *still in operation*. If so, then surely Kongō Gumi, the first member of the list, should not be there, since it ceased operating in 2006. mmj (talk) 03:16, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think that basically the company Kongō Gumi is still a group and in operation which Takamatsu Holdings purchased. Mr. Toshitaka Kongō(men wearing the red clothes), the 39th master Kongō, is an executive officer, most of the employees have kept working for Kongō Gumi and they use same building and same mailing address having same customers. If there is no company originated from Kongō Gumi, I see a problem. Or if Kongō Gumi got merged by Takamatsu, that's highly debatable. My impression, Nissan is subsidiary of Renault but it's still Nissan as a group. However if there is not Nissan as a group and Renault is selling Nissan brand cars, it's not already Nissan but like Chevrolet or Prince.--Orcano (talk) 09:02, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_oldest_companies&oldid=527414413"