Category talk:Lists of companies

This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Lists This category is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Companies This category is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. WikiProject Companies To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes Maintain : Portal:Companies Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs Other : Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner Answer requests for comments Business This category is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.

Companies or Corporations

Shouldn't this be retitled to a List of Corporations or are we still in the 16th century? Should we be including Mom-n-pop stores in here? A Company is almost slang for a corporation. Or should it be cross-listed with Companies and Multinational Corporations Stevenmitchell 15:22, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Company" is still used in the UK, e.g. Companies House. There's also the Companies Act; while companies law includes corporations and partnerships within companies. We have WP:ENGVAR to consider too. So I think it seems OK to keep things as they are. -- Trevj (talk · contribs) 07:55, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]