Talk:W H Smith

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Organizations WikiProject This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Organizations. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

About my "massive rewrite": firstly, I have tried to consistenly use "it" and the singular for the company throughout (I think I broke down towards the end). This isn't to everyone's taste, so I'm sorry if you don't like it. Secondly, two factoids from the previous article didn't make it in, because they seemed trivial to me:

The W H Smith staff journal, Newsbasket, was published between 1908 and 1978, and provides an interesting business and social history of the firm at that time.

This seemed potentially interesting, but I'm not sure how easy it is to refer to copies of this internal publication. In taking it out I have orphaned the Newsbasket article; maybe it should go back in as a "see also", but I'm not sure.

A W H Smith newsletter for the third age, Primetime was published from January 1995 to April 1996 and was edited by David Alston.

This lasted less than a year and was only a "newsletter", not even a magazine. The link to Primetime led to another topic altogether, anyway.

I may also have wandered into POV in my assessment of the offerings at W H Smith. Be bold if you disagree. --rbrwr± 17:50, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] WHSmith

I can't see why this article is "W H Smith" rather than "WHSmith" which is the name in the format currently used by the company. Are there any objections to the article being moved? (and yes, I do know the variants are re-directs, and maybe it isn't over important) UkPaolo 20:28, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

WHSmith does seem to make sense, but I don't feel particularly strongly about it. I would note that they brand their shops WHSmith, but refer to the company as WH Smith plc (with a space between H and S).
By the way, here's a list of variants (rescued from my sandbox) that I used when I was setting up those redirects (for some reason I couldn't be bothered to do them all). --rbrwr± 20:45, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Partial rewrite

I've done a partial rewrite of the introductory section of the article. I've added new headings, which can hopefully be expanded further to explain the current operations of the company (the article as it stands seems largely focused on the history, and I'm not sure gets across the nature of WHSmith stores for people not from the UK who may not be familiar with them). UkPaolo 21:31, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] correct title

I work for WHSmith Retail so I have to deal with the guff that comes in and out of the shop on a daily basis.

Despite mail coming addressed to "WHSmith", "WH Smith", "W H Smith", "W.H.Smith", and vaients of that using Smiths as well as John Menzies the official names are as follows.

WH Smith PLC WHSmith Everything Else

Therefore I would suggest using WH Smith as the artcicle refers to the company as a whole.


Regarding the newsletters - they've been superceeded by ad-hoc communication on the company intranet.


81.178.236.108 16:24, 11 November 2005 (UTC)


  • I work for WHS too, and per my section above would favour a move to "WHSmith". UkPaolo 19:10, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
Move it then. Skinnyweed 12:56, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
But it is clear from the above msg that at least someone else would disagree with this title. It certainly wouldn't appear there's any consensus for a move, despite my personal preference. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 19:05, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Smith's in Scotland, Menzies in England

A few questions, since I was adding a bit to the article:-

  • Prior to the late-1990s (or mid-1990s), did W H Smith have any large ("high street") stores in Scotland?
  • Ditto the small railway stores- I'm pretty sure I saw some there, but I may be wrong.
  • How dominant was John Menzies in the UK-wide "railway station" market?
  • Did Menzies have any large-format stores outside Scotland?

Fourohfour 12:21, 3 January 2006 (UTC)


The Menzies stores in England that WHS took on did include High street branches, but they tended to be small suburban branches as far as I can tell (all the English ex-Menzies that are part of the estate now that I can think of off the top of my head are in small towns).

  • My own question:

Anything about the takeover or merger of Preedy's/Preedies in the 80s/90s anywhere? Since I know of several ex-Preedy now WHS (with staff who were Preedy staff) --Lazaqat 20:53, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: the inversion of Private Eye magazine in branches of W H Smith

Hi UKPaolo, Just FYI I discussed the frequent inversion of Private Eye recently with a friend who works at W H Smith, and he admitted it is an internal cultural thing, and tacitly encouraged by some members of senior management. I think I saw someone else comment about it somewhere on the web a year or two ago, if I find the link I will throw it your way for your consideration. Sjc 05:24, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I find that most interesting... I have worked at a management level in several branches of WHS, and have never come accross such a concept. I'm aware many magazines are distributed to the stores with half of them upside down (so as to level out the pile with spines on alternating sides) and frequently put out on the shelves like that, which can lead to magazines left displaying the wrong way up. When I saw your remark, if I'm honest, I assumed it to be little more than the case that you'd noticed Private Eye upside down on a few occasions and read more into it than just chance. If there is something more behind it then I've never come across it, and am most interested to learn of the idea — if you do have such a link please do forward it my way! Even if seemingly true in a number of stores, I do have my doubts about the relevance or encyclopedic content of such a statement, but I shall understand if you wish to re-add it to the article and leave it be. Cheers for your explanation, └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 07:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
I have a spider running now using the Google API. I have moved this to the talk page of the WHS article in the meantime where I think it probably rightfully belongs. Your suggestion that it may be haphazard or related to the spines being levelled out is intriguing, but my curiosity was piqued by the fact that it is almost invariably Private Eye which is upside down, particulalry given the nature of the history between Private Eye and WHS! Sjc 08:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Most magazines at some point during the week end up upside down as they come in like that to level off the spines. As they remain on the shelves the other edge of them "flomps" downwards making the magazine look untidy so there is essentially a "stock rotation" where the magazines at the back are turned upsidedown to counteract this problem.

[edit] Sound FX

Prior to buying the Our Price chain, Smith's owned Sound FX, a record store which was merged with Our Price in 1986. Nothing about Sound FX is mentioned here. I can't add anything as I have looked high and low for information... anyone able to add anything? 205.188.117.71 22:16, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Old Logo

The article did state that the old box-shaped logo was used until 2004 (I have changed this). I know – and I'm sure most others can remember this – that the old logo was actually dropped in the early- or mid nineties, but I don't know which year. Can anyone help? — Stonefield 21:52, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cut-and-paste Page Move: Reversion

Regarding the move from W H Smith to WHSmith; this has been reverted. This wasn't due the name chosen (an important, but entirely separate issue; see below). It was because the move used cut-and-paste; losing the edit history- discourteous to contributors, as well as breaking the GFDL.

I know that it's not possible to properly move the page (without Admin powers) because WHSmith is an existing article. However, cut-and-paste moves are bad, full stop.

(I should make clear that the move was- apparently- carried out in good faith, and that the editor was a relative newcomer, so no hard feelings or blame intended towards them. Sorry if this came across as a lecture.)

Fourohfour 14:31, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page title

Since I had to deal with the page move reversion anyway, we may as well discuss whether the page move was a good idea (even if it was executed badly).

There may be a case in favour if "WHSmith" reflects an actual official company name change and/or W H Smith are making a big deal about this rebranding.

On the other hand, if the removal of spacing simply reflects a minor stylistic issue over how Smiths wish their existing name to be presented, then (IMHO) leave the page where it is. Moving it for the sake of some over-extrapolated (if not misleading) pseudo-precision would be utterly pointless; just another form of wiki-masturbation that requires more link-maintenance.

Fourohfour 14:31, 9 November 2006 (UTC)