Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (definite or indefinite article at beginning of name)

Article for company names that end with "Corporation"

Should companies whose full name end with "Corporation" be written with an article (at least in the first sentence of the lead section)?

This is true for IBM ("The International Business Machines Corporation [...]"), but not so for Nvidia or Microsoft ("Nvidia Corporation [...]" and "Microsoft Corporation [...]"), for example.-- Maxeto0910 (talk) 00:48, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't think we could make a general rule; usage is too varied. I'd look at reliable independent sources and follow them. SchreiberBike | ⌨  11:31, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Think of it like country names. Basic descriptions (like International Business Machines or United Kingdom) get "the", specific names (like Nvidia or China) don't. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:25, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

@Khajidha: That's a good general rule, but there are so many exceptions. Follow the majority of reliable independent sources. SchreiberBike | ⌨  23:26, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

True, but for a first approximation it's pretty good. User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 15:10, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

'The' dispute

I'm fine if my position about this is wrong, but if anyone would like to bring their thoughts to a discussion on how someone's nickname that starts with 'the' or 'The' should be handled in the midst of a sentence, it would be helpful. See Talk:Sonny Liston#Capitalizing 'The' in nickname in the midst of a sentence. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 21:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

The clear answer is at MOS:THENAME, where an example given is:

*Use Dwayne "the Rock" Johnson not Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson

Hope that helps. SchreiberBike | ⌨  23:07, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

It does help. Thank you. It helped me zero in on a more concise argument. At any rate, the issue at Sonny Liston is the other editor thinks they understand basic grammar better than me, and that therefore "The Big Bear" must have 'The' capitalized in the midst of a sentence. Stefen Tower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 23:25, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Is using definite articles to disambiguate between topics acceptable?

According to WP:NATURALDIS, it is often preferred to use natural disambiguation over parenthetical disambiguation in instances where there is a possible natural disambiguation. Is it acceptable to do so even when the natural disambiguation is done by placing a definite article? The current formulation of this guideline does not give any indication about this, and I have never seen a case where it was decided to use a definite article as natural disambiguation, so it seems Wikipedians have generally decided "no".

There was an RFC about this and the result seems to indicate yes, but that was ten years ago. I do not know if the RFC is still in effect. If it is, I would like to see this guideline updated to reflect its results.

On another question, why is the definite article generally regarded as an exception to WP:NATURALDIS? If somebody could explain the reasoning to me, I would be very appreciative. Ladtrack (talk) 21:53, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps your question would be more clear if you used an example, or better yet, the exact name in question. SchreiberBike | ⌨  18:34, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

There are probably a million examples. I don't even know where to start. I'll use one of the examples on this page. The title for the band usually referred to as the Eagles is Eagles (band). I get why removing the "the" is preferred, but in this case it would not be the primary topic for Eagles, hence the disambiguation. Now, WP:NATURALDIS says that natural disambiguation is often preferred to parenthetical disambiguation, which is the current use applied there. By that metric, it should be The Eagles, which it is the primary topic for, based on the fact that that term redirects there. But this guideline apparently supersedes that?

The RFC I linked says that allowing the definite article in the title as a form of natural disambiguation, as in the example I provided, is acceptable. But as you can see, it was not put into place for the article for this band, and as far as I can see, has not been put into place anywhere else either. If it still applies, do you think it would be possible to put that result somewhere in this guideline so people know about it? Ladtrack (talk) 22:23, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

The Eagles is a case that has been much discussed. Here is the most recent summary. Apparently, the consensus is that the name of the band does not include "The", although they are often known as such and simple grammar generally requires using "the" in prose references. This is an example of an an exceptional case that doesn't provide a good basis for making policy. older ≠ wiser 11:35, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Also there a many cases where "The" is used for natural disambiguation. I'm not aware that current guidelines prohibit using "The" as natural disambiguation where the usage is appropriate. older ≠ wiser 11:38, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

For some examples, you might look around using a prefix search such as this. I started at 'The P' at random and quickly came across The Pacifier, rather than The Pacifier (film) or Palace (film); and The Palace, rather than The Palace (TV series) or Palace (TV series). Such uses of 'The' for disambiguation are more often than not titled works. older ≠ wiser 14:40, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey, sorry if I'm misunderstanding you, but I feel that these are a little bit different. Both of the examples you gave are referring to instances where the official title, not the common name, includes the "the". This is explicitly permitted by this guideline, in which it gives examples like The Scream or The New York Times. The two examples you provided are in that vein, in which the actual, official title of the work includes the "the", which is why the article in question does so as well. It is not because of disambiguation. I didn't carefully dig through every example listed at the prefix search, but almost all the ones I checked seem to also have the "the" included in the proper title.

What I am describing is a little different. The band the Eagles should ideally be at the title "Eagles". However, the bird is the primary topic for that name, and so Eagles redirects there. From there, there are two options. The first is the band's official name, Eagles, with a parenthetical to distinguish it from the bird. That title would be Eagles (band). The other option would be what is not the official title, but is instead the common name of the band, which is The Eagles. Which to use? Well, WP:COMMONNAME says that "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's official name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used". Plus, according to WP:NATURALDIS, names that are disambiguated without parenthetical disambiguation (The Eagles) is preferred to names that include parenthetical disambiguation (Eagles (band)).

So, both of these seem to me to indicate that the better title would be The Eagles. So why isn't it? Well, from my check of the talk page archives, it seems to me that a big reason is because of this guideline. Now, of course, this guideline does not supersede or contradict those policies. And the result of the 2014 RFC agrees with that, finding that disambiguation is an acceptable reason to include the definite article. But that conclusion has not generally been implemented, probably because this guideline was not changed to reflect the result of the RFC. I'm asking for a sentence to reflect that result. This wouldn't be a change in what the guideline means, just a change in wording to clarify.

By the way, if you want other examples of people avoiding a natural disambiguation because it would include a definite article, I dug up a few here. All of these have the common name (with the definite article) redirecting to the article, but stick with parenthetical disambiguation in order to avoid using a "the". Hopefully this will show that current standard practice is to avoid using a definite article even when it could be disambiguation.

•General Lee (car) should really be The General Lee, but a fix proposal failed primarily because of concern that this guideline applied.

•Watusi (dance) used to be The Watusi, but it was changed along with a few other dances because of this guideline.

•Flash (DC Comics character), who is widely referred to as The Flash.

•Hatter (Alice's Adventures in Wonderland) used to be The Hatter, but it was changed because of this guideline.

•Occultation (Islam) used to be The Occultation, but it was changed because of this guideline.

By the way, sorry if I seem long-winded or as though I am belaboring the point. I really appreciate you taking the time out to answer my question, and I feel that I should repay the courtesy by making sure my response is thorough. Ladtrack (talk) 22:03, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Welp, it's been a week since anyone responded, I'm doing it. If I mess up the formatting or wording, please correct it for me, I'm still new at this. If you disagree, please leave a comment here when you revert so we can talk about it. I would really have rather talked about this first, but here we are. Ladtrack (talk) 03:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)