Talk:Arcelor Mittal
Latest comment: 15 years ago by 83.100.251.196 in topic Merge Archelor and Mittal with ArchelorMittal
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Arcelor Mittal redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Move from "Arcelor-Mittal" to "Arcelor Mittal"
editThere is no "-" in the company name. See:
- Official website
- NYSE
- Euronext
- Google finance
- BBC News
- Financial Times
- Forbes
- MartinHagberg|MartinHagberg]] 15:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
- I've now moved the page from Arcelor-Mittal to Arcelor Mittal. / MartinHagberg 15:59, 2 May 2007 (UTC)\
Move again?
editWhen Arcelor Mittal launched their new brand identity, they started to write the company's name with CamelCase: ArcelorMittal. Should this article be moved to ArcelorMittal? MartinHagberg 12:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
- Agree. There should be no space in the title. Languagehat (talk) 15:26, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
If you see the company website, the name is always written without a space. I am an employee of the company and when the new brand identity was launched the company communications were VERY clear that the name must always be written as one word, with no space, no dash, and both the 'A' and the 'M' always capitalized. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.53.160.51 (talk) 17:54, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Merge Archelor and Mittal with ArchelorMittal
editI think not - they are both equals, it's not as if one giant company absorbed a small one. So you can't easily pull two full histories into 1 article. 82.211.87.61 10:50, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. Let Arcelor and Mittal Steel Company on its place with its history. --Jklamo 17:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- Same here. If we do this we might as well merge all companies that merge.Nejee16 02:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
- Disagree with merger I also agree. There is a tendency to merge all companies together; Arcelor and Arcelor Mittal have different histories. The articles should be linked, not merged together.--Scotchorama 12:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Absolutely not, as per above comments. Choalbaton (talk) 19:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- No to merge - overall effect is to create a current events page, with loss of historical information. (removing tags - clearly not going to happen_>83.100.251.196 (talk) 00:52, 7 November 2009 (UTC)