Template talk:Companies law
| WikiProject Law | (Rated Template-class) | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||||||||
Contents |
[edit] Vectorization
I noticed that there was a new SVG version of the Scales of Justice on the Wikimedia Commons, so I replaced the older PNG with it.
Tyler 15:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Business Trust
Business Trust is currently linking to "Massachusetts Business Trust"... Seems to me that there should be some more general business trust article to link to.
[edit] Template name
I've changed the name to Companies law from business law because business law sometimes has a few meanings. In this case, the link led to "commercial law" which is about commercial/business transactions generally; this template is about business forms specifically, and I think it'll cause less confusion renaming it "companies". Wikidea 10:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Making a "company types" section
"Company types" in the U.S. includes corporations, partnerships, sole proprietorships etc. But in UK law it's the other way round - a company is a type of corporation, and partnerships are not companies. So if we need a heading for the top section of the template, it shouldn't be "company types" but "business types" or something like that - although that might lead to disputes about whether all companies are businesses (some are e.g. charities), so probably best not to bother with a heading at all.--Kotniski (talk) 15:55, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Business associations perhaps? Then again, companies is just easier and shorter. I'm sure nobody's really bothered about partnerships being listed under companies, because everyone knows that they're similar (esp since we have LLPs in the UK now). Wikidea 18:19, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
-
- Yeah, but this template is about law, so better keep it as free from inaccuracies as is practical. I don't mind having links to partnerships etc. appearing in this navbox titled "companies law", but I can't agree with using "Types of companies" as a title of a list of entities which are generally not companies, when we can and do manage equally well without any title there at all.--Kotniski (talk) 19:02, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Delaware and Nevada?
Do we really need Delaware corporation and Nevada corporation in the template? Sure, the states have corporate-friendly laws, but every state has some kind of corporate law, and some share of corporations. bd2412 T 23:22, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Nordic company types
There are currently listed four Nordic company types on the template: The Swedish / Finnish AB ('share company' -- both plc and ltd), the Norwegian ANS (literally 'liable company', one of the two partnership types in Norway, the other being DA, 'shared liability'), the Norwegian AS ('share company', equivalent to a British ltd), and the Danish AS ('share company', equivalent to a British plc).
Shouldn't the template be cleaned up? Since the ltds are the most common type in Norway and Denmark, I suggest we drop the ANS and exchange the Danish AS with the Danish ApS (lit. 'part company', the 'part' being a share). Optionally drop the ANS, add the ApS and the Norwegian ASA ('public share company', equivalent to the Danish AS and British plc). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.238.43.182 (talk) 23:33, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
