Talk:Orient Overseas (International) Limited

Requested move 14 December 2020

 * 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.

No consensus to move. After much-extended time for discussion, there is a clear absence of consensus. I am restoring the previous title, Orient Overseas (International) Limited, boldly moved from, to make it clear that this is not a disambiguated title. Nothing prevents a new move request from being initiated after a reasonable pause. BD2412 T 02:58, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Orient Overseas (International) → Orient Overseas – According to Google ngram. "Orient Overseas" is the common name, rather than the longer name Orient Overseas (International) Limited, Orient Overseas (International) or OOIL. This may due to the popularity of the subsidiary, OOCL, or other namesake that i can't remember. But the ngram prove "Orient Overseas" should be the common name. And "Orient Overseas " is long served as a redirect to this article.

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Orient+Overseas%2C+OOIL%2C+Orient+Overseas+%28International%29%2C+Orient+Overseas+%28International%29+Limited&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=26&smoothing=3&direct_url=t1%3B%2COrient%20Overseas%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2COOIL%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2COrient%20Overseas%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2COOIL%3B%2Cc0 Matthew hk (talk) 18:52, 14 December 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  14:18, 22 December 2020 (UTC)


 * edit: adding other evidence:
 * The subsidiary is known as OOCL, or Orient Overseas Container Line, without IL in it.
 * https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Orient-Overseas-days-as-a-family-business-are-numbered
 * https://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/25/business/worldbusiness/pension-plan-in-ontario-is-buying-ports-in-us-and.html
 * https://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/15/business/global/15ship.html
 * https://www.nytimes.com/1972/04/09/archives/full-floors-leased-at-88-pine-st.html
 * https://www.nytimes.com/1964/02/23/archives/new-ship-agency-formed.html Matthew hk (talk) 10:10, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Oppose: The company's website uses OOIL, so I would say "Orient Overseas" is just an abbreviation. The official name is quite similar to the abbreviation, so it will not increase people's familiarity with the topic. Threedotshk (talk) 01:53, 17 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Please read WP:Article titles and WP:officialname. We don't usually use official name unless it is also the common name and/or fit the 5 criteria started in WP:Article titles. Matthew hk (talk) 09:45, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Exactly. The company's own website is a primary source and irrelevant here. That !vote shows no understanding of the issues. Andrewa (talk) 10:05, 30 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Also, Orient Overseas group long existed before the incorporation of OOIL. Matthew hk (talk) 10:10, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Oppose: the proposer appears to be going for change for changes sake. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 08:53, 17 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Please don't use WP:IDONTLIKEIT logic in wikipedia. Using "OOIL site:reuters.com" as search term, has much much smaller result than using "Orient Overseas site:reuters.com". Which is another evidence on top of google ngram. Matthew hk (talk) 09:47, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Exactly. That !vote shows no understanding of the issues. Andrewa (talk) 10:05, 30 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Relisting comment The nominator has presented evidence that the current name is not the common one. Is there any evidence to the contrary? (t &#183; c)  buidhe  14:18, 22 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Support. I note that the proposed target is already a redirect to this article. The proposed name is unambiguous and more concise, and must logically be more common than the longer name as it is trivially more concise. Andrewa (talk) 10:05, 30 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Per nom, the search results for "Orient Overseas" "may due to the popularity of the subsidiary, OOCL (Orient Overseas Container Line)". It hasn't been established that those search results refer to OOIL and not to OOCL, so there is no evidence to support the move. Vpab15 (talk) 15:03, 30 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Actually you can't tell Orient Overseas' primary topic is the container line or the whole business group itself. But the ngram tell me that more publication use "Orient Overseas" only and less for Orient Overseas Container Line(s). https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Orient+Overseas%2COrient+Overseas+Container+Lines%2C+%2COrient+Overseas+Container+Line+%2COrient+Overseas+Lines&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=26&smoothing=3&direct_url=t1%3B%2COrient%20Overseas%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2COrient%20Overseas%20Container%20Lines%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2COrient%20Overseas%20Container%20Line%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2COrient%20Overseas%20Lines%3B%2Cc0 And yes the current situtation is another cancer of overlapping article. As of 2020, Orient Overseas' revenue, (edit: more than 08:57, 5 January 2021 (UTC)) 90% is from container line and in the past it has port operation and passenger liner. Matthew hk (talk) 15:21, 3 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Note to page mover. Actually i made a bold move to drop the legal suffix Limited already. I think if it is closed as no consensus may be add it back . Matthew hk (talk) 15:14, 22 January 2021 (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.

Content
The article / stub was lack of content for ages. Also, it may be lost in translation on digging the ship name the company (or sister company) owned. Seawise Giant, was credited in C.Y. Tung's obituary as the world's largest ship at that time. But the ship was owned by C.Y. Tung's private company, or Orient Overseas? Matthew hk (talk) 12:52, 17 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Or instead, should we mention RMS Queen Elizabeth aka Seawise University at all? Matthew hk (talk) 15:25, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

1947, 1969 or other date of foundation
Separate problem. The content, made by User:Ricky@36 (aka User:Ricky36 of zh-wiki), was not challenged for over 10 years, but his content contain a lot of typo and no hope to contact him and ask him to online again to fix it.

So. 1969 foundation is wrong. Here is the version by Ricky@36 in Y2009. The primary source only stated " With the emergence of containerization, the company was re-named Orient Overseas Container Line in 1969. "

While for 1947, the primary source stated "In 1947, he achieved that dream when the first ship with an all-Chinese crew reached the Atlantic coast of the USA and Europe.". Forbes also used 1947 as date of foundation. So what exact wording should we use on the year of foundation and form of foundation? Note that a lot Chinese companies was not incorporated but as "Associate" / "Unlimited Liability Company" until some time later due to the post-war reform of Hong Kong's business laws Matthew hk (talk) 14:30, 17 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Forbes states that Tung founded Orient Overseas in 1947. OOCL was named in 1969 with the container revolution. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 14:37, 17 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Actually Forbes did not state the name of the company, but "Founded in 1947 by his father, Tung Chao Yung, the empire had more than 330 offices in 70 countries.". It could referred be the companies under C.Y. Tung Group of Companies, instead of just " Orient Overseas Container Line" / " Orient Overseas Line". Matthew hk (talk) 14:41, 17 December 2020 (UTC)


 * In other words, 1947 can be the foundation date of the whole empire, but OOCL / OOIL is only one of the offshot. However, even worse, before WWII, C.Y. Tung already involved in shipping as a son-in-law of a shipping tycoon. Thus, may be I would like to chop the whole foundation date content until i or someone dig out the wording from The International Directory of Company Histories or other reliable source . Matthew hk (talk) 15:04, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Category:Former companies in the Hang Seng Index
I have removed the cat Category:Former companies in the Hang Seng Index. It may be true that Orient Overseas may be a component of Hang Seng Index in the past, but since there is no citation in the body text and i haven't dig out one yet, the cat can't be added to the article. Matthew hk (talk) 14:46, 17 December 2020 (UTC)