Difference between revisions of "Talk:Lizars"
Rebollo fr (talk | contribs) (→Page title: some links for further discussion) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Page title == | == Page title == | ||
We should have Lizars instead of J. Lizars '''and''' Hunter instead of R. F. Hunter, '''unless''' there is some ambiguity such as E. Krauss vs G. A. Krauss. The general rule of thumb for the title of a company page is to give the shortest form needed to recognize the company. Who would want "Victor Hasselblad" as a page title instead of "Hasselblad", or "J. H. Dallmeyer" instead of the universally known "Dallmeyer"? --[[User:Rebollo fr|Rebollo fr]] 10:47, 8 September 2008 (EDT) | We should have Lizars instead of J. Lizars '''and''' Hunter instead of R. F. Hunter, '''unless''' there is some ambiguity such as E. Krauss vs G. A. Krauss. The general rule of thumb for the title of a company page is to give the shortest form needed to recognize the company. Who would want "Victor Hasselblad" as a page title instead of "Hasselblad", or "J. H. Dallmeyer" instead of the universally known "Dallmeyer"? --[[User:Rebollo fr|Rebollo fr]] 10:47, 8 September 2008 (EDT) | ||
| − | + | : "J. Lizars" is the renowned brand and company name, none other. It's the shortest form. "Hasselblad" is alright as Hasselblad because all know this as brand and company name. U. Kulick 16:35, 8 September 2008 (EDT) | |
| + | :: I visited the links in the current page, and some others, and I still disagree. [http://www.blackandlizars.com/about/index.php This link] to the current Black & Lizars official website says ''"Black & Lizars was formed in 1999 as a result of a merger between two of Scotland's oldest optical retail chains - Lizars and C. Jeffrey Black."'' I guess they know how they were called themselves, yet they don't use a "J." [http://www.edinphoto.org.uk/pd/pd_lizars_adverts_1913_05.htm#advert This other link] shows an advert titled "Lizars' Challenge Hand Cameras", and many similar adverts are visible at the bottom of the linked page. These adverts indeed use the full form "J. Lizars", but in the footer only, not in the main part where the colloquial name is given. Common sense dictates me that people living in the 1910s or 1920s did not spell each and every initial when they were referring to some particular company, unless some disambiguation was needed. --[[User:Rebollo fr|Rebollo fr]] 19:38, 8 September 2008 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 23:38, 8 September 2008
Page title
We should have Lizars instead of J. Lizars and Hunter instead of R. F. Hunter, unless there is some ambiguity such as E. Krauss vs G. A. Krauss. The general rule of thumb for the title of a company page is to give the shortest form needed to recognize the company. Who would want "Victor Hasselblad" as a page title instead of "Hasselblad", or "J. H. Dallmeyer" instead of the universally known "Dallmeyer"? --Rebollo fr 10:47, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
- "J. Lizars" is the renowned brand and company name, none other. It's the shortest form. "Hasselblad" is alright as Hasselblad because all know this as brand and company name. U. Kulick 16:35, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
- I visited the links in the current page, and some others, and I still disagree. This link to the current Black & Lizars official website says "Black & Lizars was formed in 1999 as a result of a merger between two of Scotland's oldest optical retail chains - Lizars and C. Jeffrey Black." I guess they know how they were called themselves, yet they don't use a "J." This other link shows an advert titled "Lizars' Challenge Hand Cameras", and many similar adverts are visible at the bottom of the linked page. These adverts indeed use the full form "J. Lizars", but in the footer only, not in the main part where the colloquial name is given. Common sense dictates me that people living in the 1910s or 1920s did not spell each and every initial when they were referring to some particular company, unless some disambiguation was needed. --Rebollo fr 19:38, 8 September 2008 (EDT)
