Talk:State Grid Corporation of China

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Requested move 26 April 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: NOT MOVED.(non-admin closure) Kostas20142 (talk) 15:09, 3 May 2017 (UTC)



State Grid Corporation of ChinaState Grid – Contested move. Per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:NCCORP, which states The legal status suffix of a company ... is not normally included in the article title. Disambiguation is not necessary because no other topics are named "State Grid". Google Trends show that "state grid" is a far more common search term than "state grid corporation of china", and web results tend to use "State Grid" more commonly than the full name. feminist 11:13, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Oppose the company used SGCC more often (at least in their web). Per the same MOS regarding company name, the full meaning of SGCC should be used. Please make a stats. count "State Grid" is the primary common name. Matthew_hk tc 12:22, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Moreover, as the company was NOT yet incorporated by the company law of China (instead, "all-people ownership law", Chinese: 全民所有制), the word "Corporation" ISN'T legal suffix. Only limited company incorporated by the company law requires to use "Co., Ltd. (Company Limited)" as legal suffix, for "all-people ownership law", Corporation is part of the name, which some "corporation" under that law may just free to use other name such as "academy of XYZ" without any legal suffix. Matthew_hk tc 13:27, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose SGSC includes "Corporation" and "China". Common name is no benefit here to readers outside China. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:44, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose Current name is simply more clear.Jklamo (talk) 07:29, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Strong Support - this is a clear-cut case of WP:COMMONNAME. The company has thousands, if not tens of thousands, of retail offices in China, and they're almost all labeled simply as "State Grid" - see photos [1], [2], and [3]. Fortune 500, which ranks the company as the second largest in the world, also called it simply "State Grid", see [4]. -Zanhe (talk) 03:57, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose for several reasons. First, the nominator does not prove that State Grid is a common name and saying that "state grid" is a far more common search term than "state grid corporation of china" does not take into account of the ambiguity of the term "state grid". Second, the current name is better for disambiguation. That's true that there is no article named State grid at the moment, but using it for this company may create confusion among non-Chinese readers. Third, I agree with Matthew hk that the company itself uses the current name (e.g. see their logo). In general, when I am strong supporter of using common names instead of official names, this case is the exemption when longer name serves our reader better. State Grid may be suitable in the wiki-China but not here. Beagel (talk) 14:55, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose -[5] Google Ngram shows massive ambiguity of generic "state grid" proposal. "State grid in English refers to football, geography, and numerous publically-owned and private electric utilities in India, US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK and others. So, this proposal does not take into account the world-wide usage of this phrase among these diverse electric utilities. Also, the Ngram search results from Google Books show the phrase existence in the 1930's- (most likely pre-dating it's usage in China by decades), when the United States was creating electric grids and long distance transmission lines to distribute power from hydro-electric dams in the early 1900's. — Preceding unsigned comment added by A ri gi bod (talkcontribs) 19:02, 1 May 2017 (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.