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: 10:24, July 14, 2014 (JST, Heisei 26) (Refresh)
What about Fuji Natura? It's a Japan only emulsion as far as I recall. However it isn't listed among the products. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Airencracken (talk • contribs) 05:17, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
This company is large and complex, and has complex naming. It does indeed seem at times to use "Fujifilm" to refer to itself as a whole as well as using this name within the names of some of its units (e.g. "Fujifilm Electronic Materials (Europe)". However, the various offshoots of this page suggest to me that the official English name of this Japan-centred corporation is "Fuji Photo Film" -- directly equivalent to the Japanese name 富士写真フイルム (Fuji Shashin Firumu). Interestingly, the Japanese website generally refers to the corporation as either "Fujifilm" (Roman letters) or 富士フイルム (Fuji Firumu), but the formal page about the corporation gives it as 富士写真フイルム (Fuji Shashin Firumu), and "Fuji Photo Film" (Roman letters) appears at the foot of most pages, perhaps all. And "Fuji Photo Film" is the olde-worlde name that appears on my Fujica Six camera (circa 1949) and also my FinePix F11 (circa 2005; true, "Fujifilm" appears on it too).
Is "Fujifilm" the best title for the article? -- Hoary 08:44, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
I say we use Fujifilm as the title (most commonly known in english) with the formal title(s) in the opening sentences. Like we apparently already do. See Microsoft, whose official name is Microsoft corporation but better known without the corporation bit. --tjstrftalk 09:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the debate was no move. Ansett 09:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Oppose, because of MoS (as I pointed out to you at 06:21 6 Dec and as I pointed out to you again at 06:34 6 Dec) and also because the world in general and WP in particular ignores quirks of corporate capitalization even when this is for names that were originally abbreviations (as I pointed out to you at 07:01 6 Dec). 'Nuff said; please do not waste more of others' time. -- Hoary 12:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Oppose "FUJIFILM" is a stylized logo rather than the name of the company. Just because we can render it in typeface doesn't mean we should. Oh, and it just so happens that MoS:TM agrees. – Anþony talk 06:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
Oppose, as per all above. Lankiveil 06:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC).
Oppose per WP:MOSTM. Besides, it's basically just a style thing that Japanese companies commonly do with their logos, not an actual part of the name. --tjstrftalk 07:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)