Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (definite or indefinite article at beginning of name)

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 91.5 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

Article for company names that end with "Corporation"

Should companies whose full name end with "Corporation" be written with an article (at least in the first sentence of the lead section)?

This is true for IBM ("The International Business Machines Corporation [...]"), but not so for Nvidia or Microsoft ("Nvidia Corporation [...]" and "Microsoft Corporation [...]"), for example.-- Maxeto0910 (talk) 00:48, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we could make a general rule; usage is too varied. I'd look at reliable independent sources and follow them. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 11:31, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Think of it like country names. Basic descriptions (like International Business Machines or United Kingdom) get "the", specific names (like Nvidia or China) don't. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:25, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Khajidha: That's a good general rule, but there are so many exceptions. Follow the majority of reliable independent sources. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 23:26, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

True, but for a first approximation it's pretty good. User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 15:10, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

'The' dispute

I'm fine if my position about this is wrong, but if anyone would like to bring their thoughts to a discussion on how someone's nickname that starts with 'the' or 'The' should be handled in the midst of a sentence, it would be helpful. See Talk:Sonny Liston#Capitalizing 'The' in nickname in the midst of a sentence. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 21:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The clear answer is at MOS:THENAME, where an example given is:

*Use Dwayne "the Rock" Johnson not Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson

Hope that helps. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 23:07, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It does help. Thank you. It helped me zero in on a more concise argument. At any rate, the issue at Sonny Liston is the other editor thinks they understand basic grammar better than me, and that therefore "The Big Bear" must have 'The' capitalized in the midst of a sentence. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 23:25, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is using definite articles to disambiguate between topics acceptable?

According to WP:NATURALDIS, it is often preferred to use natural disambiguation over parenthetical disambiguation in instances where there is a possible natural disambiguation. Is it acceptable to do so even when the natural disambiguation is done by placing a definite article? The current formulation of this guideline does not give any indication about this, and I have never seen a case where it was decided to use a definite article as natural disambiguation, so it seems Wikipedians have generally decided "no".

There was an RFC about this and the result seems to indicate yes, but that was ten years ago. I do not know if the RFC is still in effect. If it is, I would like to see this guideline updated to reflect its results.

On another question, why is the definite article generally regarded as an exception to WP:NATURALDIS? If somebody could explain the reasoning to me, I would be very appreciative. Ladtrack (talk) 21:53, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps your question would be more clear if you used an example, or better yet, the exact name in question. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 18:34, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are probably a million examples. I don't even know where to start. I'll use one of the examples on this page. The title for the band usually referred to as the Eagles is Eagles (band). I get why removing the "the" is preferred, but in this case it would not be the primary topic for Eagles, hence the disambiguation. Now, WP:NATURALDIS says that natural disambiguation is often preferred to parenthetical disambiguation, which is the current use applied there. By that metric, it should be The Eagles, which it is the primary topic for, based on the fact that that term redirects there. But this guideline apparently supersedes that?

The RFC I linked says that allowing the definite article in the title as a form of natural disambiguation, as in the example I provided, is acceptable. But as you can see, it was not put into place for the article for this band, and as far as I can see, has not been put into place anywhere else either. If it still applies, do you think it would be possible to put that result somewhere in this guideline so people know about it? Ladtrack (talk) 22:23, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]