From Wikicompany

COSCO has a company listed in Singapore as (SGX: C21). How should this be presented?

Using a stock exchange templete in the first line of the article is fine. There is a problem when using these templates in the companybox template, which I need to look into (bug added to Wikicompany:Bugs. But I'm aware that the mediawiki templating system is limited (sometimes for good reasons, such as performance). (Note: that you can sign your talk message by using 4 ~ tilde signs). Walden 17:33, 25 Jul 2005 (CEST)

Another thing, should the company be added separately using a presence format? Kenchew 18:15, 25 Jul 2005 (CEST)

The company profile should describe the overall company details (products/services, service region scope, financials, history, etc.) while the "Presence:" namespace should be used for local offices, local shops, local service points, etc. If COSCO has 50 offices around the world, each of these could get an entry in the presence namespace. If you meant something else with your question, let me know. Walden 18:29, 25 Jul 2005 (CEST)
It is a bit more complicated. COSCO is a group, the listed company is a subsidary. The Group itself is not listed. You can see that they have many other listed companies. For investor buying a particular share they might be more interested in the listed company itself then the group. Is it possible to do this using presence? Or to created another entry like what is done in the subsidery section? Kenchew 06:54, 29 Jul 2005 (CEST)
The COSCO article is about the top-level COSCO Group, any of the COSCO subsidiaries should get their own company profile article (not a presence article), since they are separate companies (a local office somewhere is not a separate company). The title for the COSCO profile has been abbreviated to "COSCO" (not "COSCO Group"), because its the parent for all the other COSCO activities. If the stock listing is specific to a COSCO subsidiary, we should add that subsidiary's profile with its stock quote reference. The link you provided, lists even more subsidiaries than the current COSCO article mentions, so there's some more work to do there. Its a company thats worth studying well IMO. Walden 12:30, 29 Jul 2005 (CEST)
Personal tools