Talk:East India Company (disambiguation)

Jordan Briska

Does anyone have any references for Jordan Briska? I can't find any mention of it. Is it a correct entry, or should it be deleted? - DBW

Added Brit. E. India Trading Co to the list. I've added it at the top of the list, as it was the most significant of the Indian trading companies, and therefore likely to be what most people are looking for when they hit this entry. - DBW

Jordan Briska was vandalism by 216.26.205.9 dated 22 Sept 2006. It replace a legitimate entry for the British East India Company. DuncanHill 11:32, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

We would like to change the name of the page to East India Company (disambiguation) and reserve the page name "East India Company" for the English/British East India Company, since in the literature it is overwhelmingly referred to as simply that. See Talk:Honourable_East_India_Company#Page_Name for more details. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 10:07, 16 October 2008 (UTC) Updated Fowler&fowler «Talk» 09:28, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Why is this discussion here rather than at Talk:Honourable East India Company, where there is a healthy history of discussion about the correct name for that article? Naming the dab page is necessarily contingent on the naming of the related articles, and whether there is a primary topic --Rogerb67 (talk) 10:06, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I didn't realize that. I reasoned that since the East India Company--> East India Company (disambiguation) would have to be made first (to free up the former), the main discussion belonged to the talk page for the article first moved, viz. here; however what you say makes more sense. Will correct. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 10:13, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Please discuss in Talk:Honourable East India Company#Requested_move. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 10:37, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is this page?

It claims to be a disambiguation page, but fails MOS:D more with each edit. Currently, it fits the criteria for a set index article, except in name. I suggest there are two alternatives;

Copyedit to conform to MOS:D
Rename to List of East India Companies or similar and reclassify as a set index using {{SIA}}. This could still be referenced in a disambiguation hatnote. The article would need to conform to Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists.

In the absence of comment, I will take the first option. Please do comment. --Rogerb67 (talk) 21:30, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your post! I've changed it conform to MOS:D (I hope). Please confirm. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 23:32, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few more changes which hopefully makes it conform better. If you're concerned about any of these, I can explain my rationale for you. --Rogerb67 (talk) 00:37, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also made a stub Portuguese East India Company; there was no suitable article in existence to point to as a source and I didn't want to delete the line from the dab, which was the only other option. Hopefully the bare bones info I've put there is OK, but I expect you're more expert in these matters. --Rogerb67 (talk) 01:48, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Fabulous job with the stub! Fowler&fowler «Talk» 15:10, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Roger67, I changed the lead entry slightly to make it similar to United States (disambiguation). I hope this is OK. If not, please correct further. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 12:00, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Genoese East India Company"

Why is this entity referenced here with no article or reference confirming it's existence? Mmj125 (talk) 21:21, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]