Talk:S&P/ASX 200

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Portal	S&P/ASX 200 is maintained by WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is not assigned to a WikiProject or workgroup. Please help with your suggestions.
Assessment comments This article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

[edit] xxx Limited or not

Until today, this list deliberately contained links to company names as listed on the S&P lists, including the word "Limited" if it was there. This was to facilitate automated or semi-automated updates if required (to this, S&P/ASX 50 and any other lists of listed companies that do or could exist such as S&P/ASX 100 or All Ordinaries index). The intent was to have the official name of the company in the list, and expect that if the actual article was named with a simpler form of name, there should be a redirect from the registered name anyway. Today, THE KING "fixed" all the links by removing "Limited" from the link title, breaking several links in the process (AMP and AWB at least).

Rather than immediately revert, I ask for opinions of anyone else who reads this talk page. --Scott Davis ^Talk 13:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Gday. No harm intended - the reason i removed limited from all of the titles was

• I had created an article on one of the companies in the list before, and ScottDavis moved it from xxx Limited to xxx.
• I am intending to create a number of articles on companies in this list, and it would be easier to just click the red link instead of create redirect pages. This would then create articles in the form 'xxx' not 'xxx Limited' - and would save having to make more redirects.

In the process of changing this, some links were broken, but i fixed all the ones i saw, and more importantly a number of links that previously linked to nothing, now point to actual articles. This was quite pleasing. If you want to move them back, no worries as this will facilitate semi-automated updates - however it would be worth checking that none of the links are broken on the way back. There are a few that will need redirects. THE KING 13:11, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

• Also can someone provide me with a reference to the policy on naming actual articles? I.e. what is the verdict - limited or no limited? THE KING 13:23, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

(after edit conflict, but was looking for the answer anyway :-) )

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies) says to use the form of name used by the company for the article. A number of company articles with "Limited" were also named that way by me after negotiation with Reflex Reaction who was enforcing the "don't use Limited" part of that convention at one stage. Sorry if I came out strong above - I was caught by surprise while I was making more redirects where needed, prompted by our discussion the other day. So now we need to work to agree on the "right" solution. In either case, I believe there should be a redirect from the other form of article name, just like town articles have redirects from <town> to <Town, State>.

My reasoning is that this is a list of companies, and the official company name contains "Limited" in many cases. Most of the articles are primarily about businesses operated by the company. I tried to do the minimum possible to the company names from the S&P website to make the list. Having done it automatically meant that capitalisation was dodgy for a few names, and there are some with strange punctuation in the list. --Scott Davis ^Talk 13:46, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I've gone more than an hour past bedtime making sure that every link in this version with links not using "Limited" (current at the time I started checking) that is not to a dab page now has a corresponding link in this version with links using "Limited" (the most recent version I edited). --Scott Davis ^Talk 15:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I have reverted to the version with "Limited" in most links. A number of the extra articles linked without it were dab pages, or different articles (examples include that Alumina is a chemical, Seven Network is a business owned by a subsidiary of Seven Network Limited). I'll try to fix any punctuation and case oddities that I noticed last night. Thanks for helping to improve the coverage of these companies. --Scott Davis ^Talk 06:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Scott, good outcome. THE KING 01:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)