Talk:Western Electric (tube manufacturer)

Proposed merge into main Western Electric article

I think that this article should be merged into the main Western Electric article. Though the company was dormant for a period and is under new ownership, it is still the same company. If you look on the website of the current Western Electric and read about the history, you will see that the current owner, Charles G. Whitener, was part of Westrex (before he bought the company)--Westrex was one of Western Electric's affiliates . So, there is a line of contiguity. Not to mention that the 300B vacuum tube brought back into production by Western Electric today was also made by Western Electric years ago--so they do make a common product. There is an article in a reputable audio magazine that treats the new Western Electric as the same company.

Furthermore, the way that way we have two articles now is confusing to readers who have to sort between two articles--some may not even realize that the company still exists--they'll think that the history of the company just ended. Western Electric still exists, and it clearly presents its history as being contiguous with its long past. So, I think that we should merge this article into the main one. It would be the right thing to do. Garagepunk66 (talk) 10:07, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

• No. They are two completely different companies. The current incarnation, the tube manufacturer, is not directly related to the old company. They bought the name and designs from AT&T and formed a new company, merely claiming the heritage because they bought the rights to use it. Western Electric has ceased to exist before the new company had started. The work they do is also quite different, with the new company focusing solely on high end tubes, and now a new high end amplifier. The history of the old company did die, and someone restarted a new company from the ashes. Even if they claim the history of the name, it isn't the same company, and that is clear from a corporate and economic stance. In fact, there are contract limitations to what they can and can't do with the name, something that wouldn't exist if it was the same company. Merging would muddy up the past use of the name, and the current use of the name, which are radically different animals. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 23:55, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

The real Western Electric died with the breakup of Ma Bell. BillyPreset (talk) 04:39, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

It seems, that since there does not appear to be a consensus to merge the two articles, then we could at least do more in the main article to make the existence of the new Western Electric more clear to readers. It is easy to miss. People looking up information about the new Western Electric are probably going to go straight to the main article--they may not see the blue link at the top or the statement about the new company buried in the Legacy section.

So, we could add a statement about the existence of the new Western Electric in the lead section (we do not have to pass it off as the same company--just make the situation clear there), and in the Legacy section, we could add a sub-heading above the statement about the new audio company. Also, I think that a better name for the Legacy section might be "Subsequent developments", because the section is not dealing with the reputation or memory of the old company, but rather about post-developments. Even if the two Western Electrics are to be viewed as separate companies, the existence of the newer Western Electric is still of vital relevance to readers, so we could better address that need in the main article. Garagepunk66 (talk) 16:37, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

• Honestly, I just hadn't gotten to it, so by all means add some in the old WE article. I had planned to eventually, although I had no exact plans of what I would include. Probably need to cover the closure and purchase of some (but not all) of the assets. I recently created this article, and had just focused on establishing notability, and real life gets in the way. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 18:38, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I could go ahead and take the merge template off of the two articles, and then we can make a few minor tweaks/additions to the old article. Incidentally, I like the new article--my only problem was that the old article wasn't clear enough about the existence of the new company. So, I think we now have a workable solution. So, I'll go ahead and take the merge templates off of the two articles, then make a few changes in the old article. Garagepunk66 (talk) 22:50, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

References