Talk:Vodafone
Latest comment: 1 month ago by ShuaiXuesheng in topic Question regarding archive consistency
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Vodafone article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
 Archives (Index) |
|
This page is archived by ClueBot III. |
Legal suffix in introductory sentence
edit@InterComMan I’ve repeatedly said that per Wikipedia standard the company’s legal suffix belongs in the introductory sentence (you can see if you just look at other company articles such as Audi, Mercedes-Benz Group and TotalEnergies), yet instead of addressing this you keep reverting edits for seemingly no reason. Professional Adriazeri (talk) 13:26, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Professional Adriazeri - You do seem to have a point. From a quick trawl of FTSE 100 companies, almost all seem to have 'plc' in the first line. Dormskirk (talk) 17:00, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- In fact, a majority of company pages have the full corporate title in the lead. WiinterU 14:38, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Adding to this, I’ve just found out there is an MoS guideline for what I’m talking about (see MOS:FIRSTCORP) Adriazeri (talk) 08:07, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- In fact, a majority of company pages have the full corporate title in the lead. WiinterU 14:38, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Protected edit request on 31 July 2024
edit | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Indus Towers is now only owed by Vodafone Group with a 3.1% share down from 21% JY-LIVE (talk) 02:28, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Left guide (talk) 04:56, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:06, 21 August 2025 (UTC)
Question regarding archive consistency
editDuring my reference check, I found a Ghost Archive link. Given that the rest of the article uses the Wayback Machine, should I transfer it for the sake of organization and consistency? Is Ghost Archive generally trusted as a primary archive here? ShuaiXuesheng (talk) 19:00, 21 April 2026 (UTC)
- Consistency is good. Did you check if the URL in question is available on wayback machine? Maybe that's why the other archive service was used. 10mmsocket (talk) 21:26, 21 April 2026 (UTC)
- Yes, I checked and it's available. If it would have been the only option I wouldn't have asked. I will wait one more day and when nobody has raised concerns by then I will repalce ghost archive by wayback on Thursday. ShuaiXuesheng (talk) 08:55, 22 April 2026 (UTC)