Talk:COSCO

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Business and Economics Portal This article is within the scope of Business and Economics WikiProject.
Stub	rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

	COSCO is part of SGpedians' Resources An attempt to better coordinate and organise articles related to Singapore. To participate, simply edit this page or visit our noticeboard for more info.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

There is a dispute between two versions. To see the other version: [1], to compare: [2]

[edit] Mainland vs PRC categorization

First, changing a category or doing a revert is not a minor edit. It is subterfuge.

Second, COSCO, like many companies based in the PRC, operate jointly across the entire PRC. Your insurance company thing isn't precedent setting, it only has one article

It's a TNC, and it operates in many countries as well. And please sign your comment. — Instantnood 08:53, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

TNC, what? Yes, the global nature of it's business tends to disagree with categorizing it regionally SchmuckyTheCat 14:29, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Actually I dont quite understand what he is talking about either!--Huaiwei 14:49, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

COSCO is a company of mainland China, and it is a TNC. Are you going to tag it as category:company of X for all places it has operations? — Instantnood 14:59, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

COSCO is a company of the People's Republic of China. If you do that, you wont have to tag it under two subcategories, would you? lol! --Huaiwei 15:33, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

To repeat myself, it is a company of mainland China. — Instantnood 15:58, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

Does your repeated statments mean it is not a company of the PRC??--Huaiwei 05:45, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Companies of mainland China, Hong Kong or Macao are all companies of the PRC. But they have to be differentiated from each other. — Instantnood 08:34, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

If you think its important to split, of coz we can..and they already are. but may I know why do you insist that this company should be called a company of Mainland China, but not the PRC?--Huaiwei 08:42, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Would a company from Luxembourg be called "a company of the European Union"? — Instantnood 09:15, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

It will if it is incorporated in the European Union...if that is possible? ;) Pls find a better analogy.--Huaiwei 11:18, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

On documents a company would say it is incorporated in the PRC, but in effect its incorporation is within mainland China. And if you are going to argue in this way, I'll have to tell you that a company "incorporated in Hong Kong" is not a company "incorporated in the PRC". — Instantnood 15:22, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

Did I argue against anything to do with Hk in this case? No. I dont give a shit if a HK-incorporated company thinks it is a PRC company or not. The simple fact is a company incorporate in the PRC is a company of the PRC. Again I ask...who are you to deny them their right to use their country name?--Huaiwei 22:13, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

In that way category:Companies of Hong Kong shouldn't be a subcategory of category:Companies of the PRC. — Instantnood 23:35, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

I knew it. That was obviously your source of insecurity all these while. Apparantly category:Companies of Hong Kong already isnt a subcategory of the PRC, so why are you freaking out? But hush hush....do you sence that I am going to make that happen too soon? :D --Huaiwei 00:30, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Who knows what you guys would do next? :-) — Instantnood 00:52, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

So, it's government owned by the PRC, so therefore it isn't part of the PRC, it's part of mainland China, because Hong Kong isn't part of the PRC? what? SchmuckyTheCat 15:52, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

oh, TNC. SchmuckyTheCat 15:48, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed

Can someone that disputes the article make a single problem statement to discuss? SchmuckyTheCat 20:16, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)