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 WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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 Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.
As it stands, the name of the company is still Research in Motion. Thus, the RIM logo should still be in the infobox. Therefor, I propose moving the page back to Research in Motion until the name change is official. However, I think the BlackBerry logo should appear somewhere in the article. Carl Quintinilla, who's at the BlackBerry 10 launch event, just said the name won't change until February 4.
Would a mod please watch the article for vandalism regarding the name and ticker symbols or block edits to that info until February 4? Michealin (talk) 18:01, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Honest well intended changes are not and have been vandalism. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:11, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
I got into an edit war with someone and tired of making the same changes over and over. Michealin (talk) 14:17, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes, the company is still called Research in Motion Ltd, and should not have been renamed. Danrok (talk) 21:30, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Someone needs to change the financial details. Blackberry probably didn't lose 646 BILLION dollars in 2013... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 04:33, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
The page is continuously edited changing the trading name to BlackBerry when it is still RIM, (for proof search NASDAQ and TSX for BlackBerry, even though the symbols are BBRY and BB respectively, the company is still (registered as) Research In Motion Limited). Yes the public name is BlackBerry, and that is what it should be known as, the trading name is still different. MThinkCpp (talk) 16:20, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
why is there no mention of Jim Balsillie being a co-founder? currently Mike Lazaridis is listed as sole founder and Jim Balsillie was just an executive — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 13:19, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived discussion 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 proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 19:05, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Oppose. It is usual practice everywhere to abbreviate "Limited" in company names as "Ltd". -- Necrothesp (talk) 23:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Fascinating. I guess we don't have a WP:CONSISTENT naming policy on "Limited" yet. So I'll weak support, I guess, since it seems that the company likes using it? RedSlash 01:01, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies) does have a comment on this, "If the legal status is used to disambiguate, it should be included in the article title using the company's own preference for either the abbreviated or unabbreviated form (such as Caterpillar Inc. and Mars, Incorporated)." --Svgalbertian (talk) 01:04, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
I should also note this is how the name is presented at TSX: BB and NASDAQ: BBRY. At both those exchanges there are many companies that use the LTD form in their name, but again here the company chose to go with BlackBerry Limited.--Svgalbertian (talk) 16:14, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.