This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Financial centre article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Globalization, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Globalization on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.GlobalizationWikipedia:WikiProject GlobalizationTemplate:WikiProject GlobalizationGlobalization articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
First, that is against Wiki rules (Financing is not something British). But more importantly, it leads to several needless misquotes of sources.
IFC is defined by the IMF. And for whatever reason (And unlike e.g., the UN) the IMF chose to define it in American English. As an ENCYCLOPEDIA we cannot just change that. If IFC weren't a defined term, I would have proposed to use Financial Hub instead, but that would also not be correct.
By default, this article should honor and honour the international character of this topic.
Hence:
The Financial Center of Manhattan. (By location)
The Financial Center of Dubai. (By name)
The Financial Centre of London
The Financial Centre of Paris
The ones open for discussion would be Amsterdam and Frankfurt. They sometimes think they use British English, but they really don't
National varieties of English
See also: Wikipedia:Article titles § National varieties of English, and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Spelling
National varieties (for example American English or British English) differ in vocabulary (elevator vs. lift ), spelling (center vs. centre), and occasionally grammar (see § Plurals, below). Articles such as English plurals and Comparison of American and British English provide information about such differences. The English Wikipedia prefers no national variety of English over others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.133.57.207 (talk) 00:54, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@76.133.57.207 my vote would be to make it American English as it is more neutral and universal. ~~ Matteow101 (talk) 18:16, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article’s nationality should not be changed without broad consensus according to
Isn't consensus just editors sharing the same personal opinion? IPs are people too🇺🇸🦅 14:53, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We can and should build a consensus on which angle of
WP:POLL of personal (general?) preferences for US or Commonwealth spelling doesn't get us anywhere. Belbury (talk) 15:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply
I'll get straight to the point: Tokyo does not deserve to be listed as an International Financial Centre. It did not even rank among the top 20 centres in the latest GFCI 33 rankings, far below other Asian cities, like Singapore (at 3rd) and Hong Kong (at 4th). Moreover, the Lost Decades made (or has been making) Tokyo, and Japan in general, experience widespread stagnation and loss of confidence. Dolphinchimpanzee (talk) 01:15, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}