This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands 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.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion 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.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
retailing 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.RetailingWikipedia:WikiProject RetailingTemplate:WikiProject RetailingRetailing articles
Should be re-worked to appear more neutral? 142.58.221.112 (talk) 17:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Requested move 11 December 2023
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.
WP:NCCORP, though I think an argument could have been made for it at one time. That time has now long passed, as the company changed its branding to just "Sharper Image" over a decade ago, and redireted TheSharperImage.com to SharperImage.com, and later just abandoned the former entirely. Independent sources since the name change consistently reflect this change, and that is what NAMECHANGES wants to see. — SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 12:49, 11 December 2023 (UTC); revised 18:05, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
PS: Sorry my initial nomination was missing a rationale. Some kind of mess-up with the rm template, I guess. — SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 18:05, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support as this does appear to align with the sources and is per
Oppose I remember the company being "The Sharper Image", so they must have changed names extremely recently after the brand was relaunched. The
WP:COMMONNAME for most of its existence as an actual company was still "The Sharper Image", and a new name put in place after a company was all but dead is not a common one. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
You anecdotal memories (which match mine) are supportable by old sources, which did often refer to the company as "The Sharper Image" rather than "the Sharper Image" or just "Sharper Image". But current sources almost invariably do not do that, and those are the ones we care more about per
WP:NAMECHANGES policy. And 11 years ago isn't "extremely recently" (though in fairness, my original nomination was broken in missing the |reason= parameter, presumably because I misspelled the parameter name). Whether the company was "all but dead" at some point wouldn't matter; lots of companies are completely dead but we still use the current COMMONNAME for them. — SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 18:05, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Support. Known in most sources today as "Sharper Image", and Wikipedia should follow what the sources use. 162 etc. (talk) 18:50, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:THE #2, "If the definite or indefinite article would be capitalized in running text", since the company has historically been known as "The Sharper Image" for the majority of its existence. A search for anything besides recent web articles brings back overwhelmingly "The Sharper Image". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:45, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
It does not pass WP:THE, per WP:NAMECHANGES, since neither the company nor independent sources still use "The", so it would no longer be capitalized in running text, if used at all, which it mostly is not except in specific-product constructions like "using the Sharper Image tool on the right and the Dyson on the left", where "the" refers to the product not the company. — SMcCandlish☏¢ 😼 18:05, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom and those above. BD2412T 22:18, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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.
.jpg){kind=small}
