Talk:Pfister (firm)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Strategically Challenged???[edit]

"Stanley Black & Decker announced that the business was strategically challenged... ". Really? Why must corporate euphanisms for non-success be used on wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.234.0.138 (talk) 22:02, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion[edit]

It is a manufacturer, but why should this article be deleted?? What is Wikipedia not that tells why?? 66.32.255.192 02:06, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I gotta concur, I don't think this is a speedy candidate. Substub yes, but encyclopaedic. --Golbez 02:12, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)

To clarify: It's not a candidate now. :) Was it okay for me to remove the speedy notice, since it doesn't qualify anymore? It's not like those get votes and have a process like VfD... --Golbez 02:16, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 move request was: page not moved: no concensus after 22 days. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 12:53, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Price Pfister → Pfister — Relisted. Vegaswikian (talk) 07:46, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Web site says this is now its official name. Georgia guy (talk) 19:31, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pfister is currently a dab page, so the article may need to be moved to something else unless there is evidence that this is the common name for Pfister.--76.66.180.54 (talk) 22:07, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. No evidence that this is the primary meaning of Pfister, or even that Pfister is the common name for Price Pfister. The DAB should be moved back [1] to Pfister unless this evidence is provided. Andrewa (talk) 15:34, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Check the web site. Georgia guy (talk) 15:52, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Almost irrelevant. Check WP:NC. Andrewa (talk) 17:16, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • What does the NC stand for?? (I clicked on it but it didn't give me something that starts with NC.) Georgia guy (talk) 17:45, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Not that this is even remotely relevant, but as you ask, it stands for naming conventions, a previous name for the page now called Wikipedia:Article titles. I use it just because it's quick to type. There's a longer link to the same page in the box that heads this section, but there it's called article title policy. Same page. This policy should be the starting point for any discussion about article names.
          • In hindsight, probably I should have instead referred you to Wikipedia:official names, which tries to put it more clearly, but is not official policy and may be a bit out of date as the practice in this area is changing. Please have a look at the various policies etc, and don't just repeat the inadequate rationale that the company have decided to change their name. That's certainly a good reason for considering a name change, but not adequate for proposing an RM, let alone to support an actual move. Andrewa (talk) 18:32, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It might also have been useful to link to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies) for guidelines on how we deal with commercial organisations. However, that doesn't offer any guidance on what to do where a name has changed. Anything pre-dating the name change is of no relevance in determining the current common use. Unfortunately, Google Advanced Search doesn't allow you to specify a time period to search for. In such cases, all you can do is examine the actual results. A quick look at the first few Advanced Search results for Price Pfister reveals that they (1) redirect to Pfister; (2) pre-date the change; or (3) include a redirect to Pfister on the page. It appears that in this case, the change has caught on and the move should go ahead (which is nearly always the case for company names). I'm somewhat puzzled by the comment that there is no evidence that this is the primary meaning of Pfister. The disambiguation page only lists one article (this one) with the specific title Pfister. It also lists the German/Swiss family name, but we don't have an article on that. Other than that it lists a whole load of people with pfister as a family name, but who are not specifically knows as Pfister. That seems pretty clear primary use to me. Skinsmoke (talk) 14:23, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: From above Anything pre-dating the name change is of no relevance in determining the current common use. Disagree. Usage is always changing. Yes, if we could do a search of recent pages only and there were enough of them, but 13:50, 25 January 2011 User:Andrewa
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. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Pfister (firm). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 01:49, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pfister_(firm)&oldid=1206602653"