Talk:Scania (company)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trucks, a WikiProject which aims to improve all articles related to trucks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ]
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating within truck articles.
This article has not been rated for quality and/or importance yet. Please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

	Companies Portal This article is within the scope of Companies WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of companies. If you would like to participate please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating assessment scale.

[edit] U.S. market

What's striking about such a global corporation is that Scania is entirely missing in the states. If I'm not misinformed Scania sold trucks here in the states in the 80's and 90's. The effort failed due to poor sales networks and overly heavy trucks. A section on this should definitely be included in the article, I could do it if I find the time. Also, the article is very poorly referenced. --Relrel (talk) 11:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Scania is sold to Volkswagen

Today (3-3-2008) Volkwagen purchased some stocks from Scania i believe from Man and is now the biggest shareholder of Scania, i dont know if this is worth mentioning.

I dont have any online resources but i overheard it in the Scania factory in The Netherlands (Zwolle) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.106.14.201 (talk) 12:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I suggest the article to be renamed since it does not follow wikipedia principles according to the following two principles:

1) The Wikipedia principles state that the articles should be named after the most used name. That 'Scania' and not 'Scania AB' is the most common name can easily be backed up by a google search for 'Scania AB' vs 'Scania', where 'Scania' by far gets more hits.

2) As the wikipedia naming convention states, the 'AB' should not be part of the article name if it concerns a company (quote: 'The legal status of the company (in English: Corp., plc, Inc. or LLC; similar statuses in other languages that can come either after or before the company name), is not normally included, i.e. Microsoft or Wal-Mart. When disambiguation is needed, legal status, main company interest or "(company)" can be used to disambiguate')

Birtitia (talk) 11:11, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Oppose. The article is housed at Scania AB because an article named Scania already exists. As that article also covers a significant subject, the very guideline you invoke above (When disambiguation is needed, legal status, main company interest or "(company)" can be used to disambiguate) comes in to play. Gr1st (talk) 11:17, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Defence: There are many articles whith the same name ('man', for instance)- that is why there are disambiguation pages. The article should have the name most commonly used by people. I found it utterly confusing that I couldn't reach scania before I realized that it was called 'scania ab´.

Birtitia (talk) 12:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I've boldy moved it. AB is meaningless to all but a few editors. MickMacNee (talk) 12:50, 27 March 2008 (UTC)