Talk:Naftogaz

Untitled
My rationale for assessement: world's largest gas-transiter, all-Europe important gas&oil transiter. Ukrained 19:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Company name
Both in official statute and consolidated financial statements - company listed as Naftogas of Ukraine. What's reason for Naftohaz Ukrainy page name? --TAG (talk) 07:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Using official web site, is Naftogaz of Ukraine. And per BGN/PCGN transliteration table, Нафтогаз = NaftoHaz. Matthew_hk  t  c  07:30, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Romanization of Ukrainian - An object that has a conventional name in English should be named that way, instead of transliterating. Ukrainian companies intentionally include English name in their statute to be correctly referred in English texts. Even more - company has changed name from Oilgas of Ukraine to transliteration Naftogas of Ukraine as result of government decree here. --TAG (talk) 08:40, 25 January 2009

(UTC) Isn't it Naftohaz? since г in Ukranian is "h", not "g" like Russian. (Cjwon348 (talk) 05:52, 4 February 2009 (UTC)).

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was no consensus. Default outcome: no move. Aervanath (talk) 17:35, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Naftohaz Ukrainy → Naftogaz of Ukraine — Per official web site — Matthew_hk   t  c  07:31, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.


 * Oppose. Legal name without legal status must be used according to Naming conventions (companies). I.e. Naftogas of Ukraine (s vs. z) --TAG (talk) 07:39, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't see any such provision; can you quote the words which you read that way? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 01:28, 27 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose both. As a rule (with some exceptions), you don't translate company names, but use transliteration. In this case, the appropriate policy is Naming conventions (Cyrillic) (Ukrainian) and therefore Нафтогаз України is transliterated Naftohaz Ukrainy. There is no controversy with Naming conventions (companies).Beagel (talk) 08:00, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm little confused where the transliteration assertion comes from. We don't have Sonī Kabushiki Gaisha, we have Sony Corporation.  We don't have Zhōngguó Yínháng, we have Bank of China.  We don't have Tata samuh we have Tata Group.  We don't transliterate أرامكو السعودية, we just have Saudi Aramco. I believe transliteration is a sort of crutch that can be used when there is no clear English usage.  That, at least, is my read of WP:ENGLISH.  In this case I think there is clear English usage and we should employ it as the title of the article: Naftogaz of Ukraine.Erudy (talk) 17:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Support Per comment above.Erudy (talk) 17:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak oppose, just on the grounds that no case was made by the nominator, see official names. Andrewa (talk) 22:48, 25 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak support; the two alternatives here are both official names, and (if there is no common English name, as is possible) we should choose the company's own. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:06, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was speedy move to correct misspelling. This does not prejudice move to any other title as a result of the separate requested move discussion. Beagel (talk) 11:11, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Naftoghaz Ukrainy → Naftogaz Ukrainy – Per previous concensus of 2009 above. The current title is a move error and needs to be speedy fixed. Beagel (talk) 04:51, 13 September 2011 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move part 2

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: page moved per request. - GTBacchus(talk) 18:04, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Naftogaz Ukrainy → Naftogaz – The "requested move" discussion above was outdated and in contradiction of Wikipedia practices. I told Beagel at User talk:Beagel that the appropriate title clearly is "Naftogaz of Ukraine" WhisperToMe (talk) 06:38, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Andrewa does make a point - A common name may be better than an official name, so I'll search the names and see what they come up with. WhisperToMe (talk) 06:41, 21 September 2011 (UTC) So actually the page should go to simply Naftogaz.
 * On Google news archives, "Naftogaz Ukrainy" gives 2,160 results.
 * On Google news archives, "Naftogaz of Ukraine" gives 1,430 results
 * On Google news archives, ""Naftogaz" -Ukrainy -"of Ukraine"" gives 12,000 results
 * WhisperToMe (talk) 06:44, 21 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Support move to Naftogaz as common name. Beagel (talk) 07:07, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.