Talk:IKEA/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Requested move 7 August 2022

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: no consensus. Given my previous (bad) experiences with hotly contested capitalizations, relisting is not likely to prove fruitful here. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 16:35, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

---

IKEA → Ikea – Per WP:NCCAPS and MOS:CAPS it is not consistently capped in independent sources. See here. MOS:TM would capitalise an acronym of a company's name. While the etymology of Ikea is an acronym, Ingvar Kamprad Elmtaryd Agunnaryd is not the actual company's name. Cinderella157 (talk) 01:58, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

PS: WP:AT is a policy document. At WP:TITLETM: Article titles follow standard English text formatting in the case of trademarks, unless the trademarked spelling is demonstrably the most common usage in sources independent of the owner of the trademark. Items in full or partial uppercase (such as Invader ZIM) should have standard capitalization ... - ie we follow the sources. A policy document is superior to guidlines. At MOS:TMCAPS (part of WP:MOS, the superior guidance): For trademarks, editors should choose among styles already in common use (not invent new ones) and, among those, use the style that most closely resembles standard English text formatting and capitalization rules [emphasis added] - ie follow the independent sources. At Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks (in the lead): When deciding how to format a trademark, editors should examine styles already in use by independent reliable sources. From among those, choose the style that most closely resembles standard English – regardless of the preference of the trademark owner. Again, we follow the sources. The evidence of independent sources does not support all-caps. Cinderella157 (talk) 11:38, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose WP:TMRULES makes MOS:CAPS pretty much null. I oppose any change. PRAXIDICAE🌈 02:06, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

You might consider the PS I added to the OP, which more fully indicates the relationship between the applicable WP:P&G. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:20, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose The trademark is IKEA (in all caps). Oppose. General Ization ^Talk 02:43, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose - I think WP:COMMONNAME applies here, even though I admit that's not what it's intended for, although it does specifically use FIFA as an example of commonname. Chaheel Riens (talk) 06:43, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

  The Fédération internationale de Football Association (the actual name of the association in full) is commonly known by the acronym FIFA. The example of "FIFA" is therefore not comparable with Ikea, which is not an acronym of the actual company name. Cinderella157 (talk) 02:12, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support, per nom and ngrams, which shows that Ikea is used about half as often as IKEA. Note that FIFA is used 20 times as often as Fifa, which is why I don't consider it a useful comparison here. BilledMammal (talk) 17:08, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

  Question: BilledMammal - I might be missing something here, but it seems that you're saying because "Ikea" is used less than "IKEA" we should move the article to the lesser-used term, rather than keep it at the more widespread "IKEA"? Chaheel Riens (talk) 20:56, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

  I know, exactly. This shows the upside-down logic of "consistency" when used in these types of RMs. Would be funny if it wasn't true. Check the n-grams everyone, no justification exists to move to a lower-case with this kind of n-gram support for the present upper-cased name. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:10, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

  ???? What do you think "consistently" means, if not an overwhelming majority like in the FIFA/Fifa case? Dicklyon (talk) 04:48, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

  Policy is to avoid using stylized capitalization like this unless normal capitalization sees very little use. In this case, the use of Ikea is more than sufficient to meet our standards. BilledMammal (talk) 05:00, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

  But the normal capitalization for initialisms is generally all caps unlike like Radar they have become common generic words. MOS:TMRULES says "Capitalize SEAT, IBM, as acronyms/initialisms.". Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:55, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

  Crouch, Swale, International Business Machines Corporation (the actual name of the company) is commonly know as IBM, which is an initialism of the actual company name. The same can be said of SEAT and FIFA. However, this is not so in the case of Ikea: the actual company name is not Inter Ingvar Kamprad Elmtaryd Agunnaryd Systems B.V. or such like. Ikea is not being used as an acronym, so there is no reasonable reason to treat it as if it was or to treat it any differently from other cases at MOS:TMRULES (such as Sony), which are commonly styled in allcaps as a trademark but the standard English text formatting is sentence case. Cinderella157 (talk) 00:10, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

  The name refers to "Ingvar Kamprad, Elmtaryd, Agunnaryd" so is an initialism. Sony isn't an initialism so it doesn't need all caps while IKEA is, if the stylism is only used in the logo (such as the Wikipedia being in all caps but otherwise us using "Wikipedia") it doesn't even need to be mentioned but if like Adidas the lower case is used everywhere it can be mentioned, probably Sony falls there but its different for initialisms. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:37, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support – Ikea is consistent with both WP:COMMONNAME, WP:TMRULES. We avoid fancy styling when the more English-like styling of a trademark word is commonly used. Dicklyon (talk) 17:26, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose initialisms are generally an exception to not using all caps (and is the standard English convention) and Britannica uses all caps in the title and throughout the article. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:26, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
• Opposeper all of the above, the n-grams, etc. Lowercasing this would be like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole (or visa versa). Randy Kryn (talk) 04:10, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

  Randy Kryn, since you mention round holes, my Ikea coffee mug has "Ikea" on the bottom. Cinderella157 (talk) 04:32, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose, they always use caps, I wouldn't recognize the name without caps. ---Lilach5 (לילך5) discuss 04:26, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

  So where a source reads "The new Ikea store is one of the main stores of Inter Ikea Shopping Centre and is based in Beijing's Daxing district", you'd have no idea what company's store they're talking about? Seems to me like the recognizability problem, if any, is in you. Dicklyon (talk) 04:53, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

• Support – I believe this is a case of MOS:ENGVAR, but given that Sweden and the Netherlands officially use BrE, the title should be named Ikea. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:11, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

  Has nothing to do with ENGVAR whatsoever, which is about words (colour, color, etc.) not proper names.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

  No, BrE treats it as a name and therefore decapitalises it as Ikea. AmE treats it as an acronym and capitalises it. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:18, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. It's an acronym, so should remain IKEA per MOS:ACRO, and this is also consitent with MOS:TM and MOS:CAPS when it comes to proper names that are acronyms.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Per MOS:ACRO1STUSE (part of MOS:ABBR and immediately follows MOS:ACRO): Unless specified in the "Exceptions" section below, an acronym should be written out in full the first time it is used on a page, followed by the abbreviation in parentheses ... Ikea is not a specified exception. However, this article does not follow that advice or the alternative convention of providing the name in full in parenthesis after using the acronym. Indeed, it would be wrong to do so, since while the name is derived from the acronym, the name of the conglomerate is not the expanded name - eg Inter Ingvar Kamprad Elmtaryd Agunnaryd Systems B.V. or such like. Capitalisation in this case not consistent with MOS:ACRO. It is not consistent with other prevailing WP:P&G and the spirit and intent of same (per my PS to the OP). Cinderella157 (talk) 10:07, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

There was a picture of a ship advertising the store?

I remember one being in here and on this Wikipedia article 5.91.185.41 (talk) 10:14, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

That picture? Arado Ar 196 (C✙T) 10:28, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Konstanz story

"German executives accidentally opened a store in Konstanz (Germany), approximately 200 miles (320 km), from their intended location of Koblenz (Germany)."

I don't find any evidence of this besides a one-sentence anecdote in the given source and websites copying it, claiming this would have happened in 1973. No other source that Konstanz ever had a store. There are many sources that the first German IKEA was in Eching near Munich in 1974, one year after the claimed mix-up. Here, here, here, ... I think we should remove that claim and just put Germany (1974) in the list of countries IKEA expanded to. --mfb (talk) 12:24, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• IKEA Alam Sutera - panoramio (1).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:22, 16 December 2022 (UTC)