Talk:Qcells

Flexcell
I think Flexcell is no longer part of Q-Cells: The company is mentioned in a press release mentioning impairments from discontinued operations in 2010: http://www.q-cells.com/uploads/media/qcells_press_release_Q1_figures_20100511.pdf Additionally I can no longer find VHF Technologies/Flexcell in last year's annual report: http://www.q-cells.com/uploads/tx_abdownloads/files/03_Annual_Report_2010.pdf (p 192/193) Can somebody please check? TigerDE2 (talk) 18:18, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Requested move 12 August 2014

 * 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. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. Proposed titles created as redirects. No prejudice against a new RM with "Hanwha Q Cells" as the proposed title. Jenks24 (talk) 12:32, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Q-Cells → Hanwha Q CELLS – Company name was changed – BR MM (talk) 08:04, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * This is a contested technical request (permalink). Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Stylization. Or to Hanwha Q Cells? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 13:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: This move request is asking for Hanwha Q CELLS using uppercase but the business press seldom refers to them with upper case. I'd propose Hanwha Q Cells as the title, but with a redirect to it from Q Cells. EdJohnston (talk) 14:34, 12 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Oppose MOS:TM/MOS:CAPS ; per AA and EJ, it should be Hanwha Q Cells if this is renamed -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 04:28, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. It seems to be a classical "official name" versus "common name" issue. The move request is argued by the change of official name. At the same time WP:NCCORP says: Whenever possible, common usage is preferred. According to WP:COMMONNAME, Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources. Q-Cells is still more commonly used name than Hanwha Q Cells. Even the company's logo still says Q Cells and not Hanwha Q Cells. Beagel (talk) 15:00, 16 August 2014 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Deletions
This article seems to have been abused somewhat. Previous versions contained more information, such as the insolvency on April 3, 2012. Horatio (talk) 11:44, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Q-Cells. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20071012192626/http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/partner/story;jsessionid=DA31EEA7021F7107C50B1323E9A5C374?id=39872 to http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/partner/story;jsessionid=DA31EEA7021F7107C50B1323E9A5C374?id=39872
 * Added tag to http://www.mz-web.de/wirtschaft/neue-maerkte-ins-visier-solarbranche-in-sachsen-an

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 22 May 2019

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover)  SITH   (talk)   14:36, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Q-Cells → Q CELLS – Hi. You were the last person editing the Q CELLS article. I was entrusted with the revision of the site. I am currently researching further documents and will correct the page again. Unfortunately I can't move any articles in other country Wikipedias (except Germany), therefore my request. Can you please move the article from the existing name to Q CELLS? Important: The emptarian sign is a protected emptarian sign.

If you can move articles on the Spanish site as well I´d be glad if you chance it there to the same name. Thank you so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephan T. (talk • contribs) 11:00, 22 May 2019 (UTC)  --Relisting. Iffy★Chat -- 18:25, 30 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose per MOS:TM/MOS:CAPS and per WP:COMMONNAME. Beagel (talk) 15:55, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Not an acronym. See Sony. Primergrey (talk) 05:07, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose per anti-MOS stylism, WP:ALLCAPS  Lazz _R  13:17, 4 June 2019 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Dash
Can we add a dash to the company's name in the first sentence "Hanwha Q-Cells Co., Ltd"? I'm not sure what the norms around adding dashes is in regards to MOS:TM. Not all sources use the dash when discussing the product, but Der Spiegel does. I can't find sources using a dash in the company name though. – Þjarkur (talk) 19:35, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * That's not a dash. Not clear why you'd want to add a hyphen there. Dicklyon (talk) 18:48, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Name change
The right name of this company is Q CELLS. Please change this name (see: https://www.q-cells.co.uk/imprint.html) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephan T. (talk • contribs) 13:05, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Your previous request, based on the same argument, was rejected by consensus on 7 June 2019. Please see . Beagel (talk) 17:51, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Can we agree that the hyphen at least will be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephan T. (talk • contribs) 13:52, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 18 June 2019

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: moved to Hanwha Q Cells. Editors prefer Hanwha Q Cells, the name the company uses to refer to itself. (non-admin closure) —  Newslinger  talk   08:22, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Q-Cells → Q Cells – Technical request for formal RM procedure per this request by, but also based on this comment by. Beagel (talk) 15:09, 18 June 2019 (UTC) --Relisting. —  Newslinger  talk   04:06, 26 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment. Not sure. The only other wiki article about this company using the name without dash is in German de:Q Cells. However, until quite recently it was named Hanwha Q-Cells and was moved by to Q CELLS which was changed to Q Cells by  per WP:TITLE. Before takeover by Hanwha the company used dash in their name. Therefore, it is not clear what is the common name of this company under which it is the best known. Beagel (talk) 15:17, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Current logo and spelling as per website is Q Cells (without dash and all caps). We do not accepts names in all caps hence Q Cells--Stauffen (talk) 17:13, 18 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment. The Company has changed its name to Q CELLS without dash. As wikipedia does not accept names in capital letters it shoud be changed. The imprint of the website says so: https://www.q-cells.co.uk/imprint.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Softschubibubi (talk • contribs) 14:11, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
 * It is not important what is the official name, it is important what is the common name. WP:NCCORP says that Whenever possible, common usage is preferred. It is not clear what is more common: the name with dash or the name without dash. Beagel (talk) 14:37, 21 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Support – The hyphen made no sense, so glad to see they changed their name. And yes, we can ignore their all-caps. Dicklyon (talk) 05:46, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Came here to possibly close the RM, however on this one I oppose - while their logo may state "Q Cells" - material on their site still refers to themselves as "Hanwha Q CELLS’s" (for example, this page. If anything the article should be moved to it's formal name Hanwha Q Cells, imo. Steven   Crossin  16:48, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what you're saying. Are you opposed to removing the hyphen?  Are you favor all-caps?  Or you just want Hanwha Q Cells as alternative proposal?  You're not making it easy to get to a consensus fix here. Dicklyon (talk) 18:50, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Editors here have claimed that the company has changed their name and stated the article should be renamed accordingly to that name. However, based on how they refer to themselves in multiple sections on their website, Hanwha Q Cells is their formal name referred to in documents, and thus the correct name. That the logo is just Q Cells is irrelevant. It’s the formal full name that counts, as in this instance, editors have not made a substantiated argument on what is a common name usage. So in absence of that, we default to how they refer to themselves, and the name all over their site in various pages and documents is the name I have suggested, style altered in line with Wikipedia policy. So yes, I do suggest a move to Hanwha Q Cells. It’s not an editors job to make consensus necessarily easy to happen, but to suggest changes in line with policy and references. Steven   Crossin  22:06, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Support – I do agree with you that Hanwha Q Cells would be more appropriate; but it's late to bring that up in this particular RM. Maybe a closer will see two of us and say OK. Dicklyon (talk) 18:53, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose as under-solving a problem. Support instead Hanwha Q Cells.  This page should be considered a subpage spinout of Hanwha Group.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:40, 8 July 2019 (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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.