Talk:Coffee Stain Studios

Article name and Coffee Stain's subsidies
Hello everyone. As the name of this discussion implies, I hope the name of this article and the subsidies that it lists could be cleared up. Based of this video by Coffee Stain themselves, I feel that this article should be renamed to just be Coffee Stain, as in the video they clarify that Coffee Stain studios is a subsidy, just like Coffee Stain Publishing and Coffee Stain North. 178.83.233.148 (talk) 07:08, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello! As per THQN's investor presentation (which is also referenced in the article), the top company in Coffee Stain's holding structure is Coffee Stain Holding AB, under which Coffee Stain Studios AB (100%), Coffee Stain Publishing AB (100%, of which the last 30% were transferred to the Holding as part of the acquisition), Coffee Stain North AB (60%) and Lavapotion AB (60%) are organized.
 * The problem is that we do not know when the Holding (or, from the context of the provided video, the "group of companies") was established; Coffee Stain Studios is the original entity that was founded in 2010, and it is the entity notable in the context of Wikipedia (WP:N), thus we primarily chronicle the story of the developer and infuse the info we gather from reliable sources (WP:V). Because of this, I think "Coffee Stain Studios" is also the appropriate article title.
 * I'm still trying to find a proper way to display this, but simply splitting the article in two would make for two stubs of which the holding would probably also lack notability. For now, I made clear that the company is organized under a parent company and also adjusted the "Structure" section to reflect the horizontal hierarchy. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 09:13, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * That seems like a suitable solution. I agree that the article should not be split. 178.83.233.148 (talk) 19:09, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm still trying to find a proper way to display this, but simply splitting the article in two would make for two stubs of which the holding would probably also lack notability. For now, I made clear that the company is organized under a parent company and also adjusted the "Structure" section to reflect the horizontal hierarchy. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 09:13, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * That seems like a suitable solution. I agree that the article should not be split. 178.83.233.148 (talk) 19:09, 30 November 2018 (UTC)