This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles 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.
This 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.
NPOV:Alabama Cooperative Extension System, written almost entirely by a news and public affairs employee at ACES, so needs some neutral eyes to give it a going-over to check for both neutrality, and layout/content inclusion, etc.
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 09:21, July 22, 2014 (JST, Heisei 26) (Refresh)
This article could do with disambiguating Winn and Coales (Denso) Ltd, given that Denso is also a notable company, and is actually the older of the two; the original "Denso Anti-Corrosion Tape" and their other products are widely known in the construction industry. DWaterson 15:56, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: not moved. Jenks24 (talk) 10:00, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Denso → DENSO – DENSO is consistently and uniformly the spelling of this company: as far as I know it is not an acronym, it is simply how the company name is written. This article was originally called DENSO, but was moved to Denso on the grounds of WP:MOS. However, I think that looking at these guidelines and the precedents in place, a company name that is spelled a particular significant way gets a page named consistent with that (eg eBay). It is therefore not helpful to have this page misleadingly named Denso - that causes this to be the only place in the Web where the company name is spelled this way! People may come (as I did) to wikipedia looking for evidence about the correct way to spell the company name ... having a wrong example in the title is bad. GreenAsJade (talk) 07:06, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I submit eBay and UNESCO as precedents that indicate that DENSO should be DENSO.
BikerBiker: why would we not do this? What advantage is there to having a different spelling in the title than in every place in the article?
Oppose - No reason to move given the clear guidelines on article naming. DENSO is a simple marketing affectation of Denso. As for your claim that this is the only place the name is show this way, what about Google Finance? Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia not a marketing resource for companies. --Biker Biker (talk) 07:35, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
First, let me restate the reason to move: this naming is inconsistent with most if not all material on the internet relating to DENSO. It is inconsistent with the way that DENSO itself refers to itself, and contributes to confusion about what is the correct way to refer to that company.
I retract the comment that this page is the "only" place where DENSO is incorrectly capitalized - clearly that is hyperbole. However, the fact that a few other places inevitably have it wrong does not mean that Wikipedia should represent it incorrectly or inconsistently with the way that the company itself represents itself.
Here are further examples in Wikipedia of how it is common and acceptable, indeed "correct" to name the page in line with the corporate capitalisation:
Should each of these be "fixed" in slavish obedience to the MOS? Should each occurence of the word DENSO in the text of the page similarly be reduced, as the MOS would appear to call for.
I think that Wikipedia should represent the common way that this word is used: all caps. Not to aid the companies marketting and branding, but to correctly reflect the world that it is documenting.
Oppose- Almost all of those have already been 'fixed', per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks: 'Trademarks in CamelCase are a judgment call. CamelCase may be used where it reflects general usage and makes the trademark more readable.', which does not apply here. Dru of Id (talk) 13:31, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Oppose We also have WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS which would mean that if there are other articles not in line with the WP:MOSTM it is not good reason to move this article to a title that violates the guideline. That said many of theses examples don't need to be fixed and the reasons for that don't apply here. Many are cammelcase which is a judgement call and this is not cammelcase. NASDAQ is a former acronym unlike this so I think that that one should be fine as well. UNESCO actually is an acronym so there is no problem there. In the case of NEC it would depend on how the name is pronounced. If it is pronounced more like neck then It should be at Nec but if each individual letter is pronounced as a separate letter then using caps is fine as well (Like NASA) however I don't see any evidence that this applies to Denso. eBay is also permitted under a specific exception to MOSTM which says that Trademarks beginning with a one-letter lowercase prefix pronounced as a separate letter do not need to be capitalized if the second letter is capitalized, but should otherwise follow normal capitalization rules. For that to apply article would need to be a dEnso. The Only article I can see in you list that appears to completely go against the MOSTM is ALGOR but the solution should be to move that article to Algor not to move this article to DENSO.--184.108.40.206 (talk) 15:03, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Oppose – See the recent discussion at Talk:Ansys, where a similar discussion closed a few days ago: Lots of companies try to promote all-caps spelling of the names of their products and the name of the company itself – perhaps just to try to make their names stand out as appearing more important. (Sony, for example, usually seems to spell its name as SONY.) Wikipedia does not need to blindly follow those suggestions. Please see the examples for REALTOR and TIME in WP:TM. —BarrelProof (talk) 19:38, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Looks like if I care enough about this issue, I need to take it to the MOS. I think the decision (in general, as well as in this specific case) is wrong, but I'm not sure if I care enough. Thanks for your input/consideration of my proposal. GreenAsJade (talk) 22:15, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.