Talk:Q4830453

Company

I removed "company" as an alias, since that's covered by company. Superm401 - Talk 05:16, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

It would be nice if someone could clarify the difference between business (Q4830453) and company (Q783794). — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 12:30, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

I tried to sort this out. business (Q4830453) is now used for organization (Q43229) involved in the trade of goods and services. company (Q783794) is for an association or collection of individuals, a type of business entity (Q1269299). Feedback more than welcome. --S.K. (talk) 00:22, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

But strange: Commons-link and category are still about company. And don't mix with enterprise (Q6881511) (but I can't explain the difference...) --Infovarius (talk) 12:27, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

I now removed the Commons link from company (Q783794) . The "problem" is, that the Commons category is named "company", even though from all I can tell it is used for what is business (Q4830453). Let's see, if this is understood. --S.K. (talk) 22:16, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

PS: Actually I really would like to understand the difference between business (Q4830453) and enterprise (Q6881511). In the languages I can understand and from the articles I checked with the help of Google translate, I can't tell the difference. Any hints more than appreciated.

The claim instance of (P31) business (Q4830453) is total nonsense in most languages. I reverted back to company (Q783794) for all companies on my whatchlist untill this mess have been sorted out. /ℇsquilo 10:30, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

@Esquilo: If you check the Wiki links you will see that this is not true. The concept instance of (P31)business (Q4830453) is an economic statement that is meaningful in nearly all languages on earth. company (Q783794) on the other hand is now for the legal concept where multiple persons are seen as a unit in contrast to e.g. a sole proprietor (sole proprietorship (Q842609)), which is also a common distinction in many/most jurisdictions. Again check out the Wiki links and the inheritance hierarchy at the talk pages. --S.K. (talk) 06:19, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations! You have changed the interwiki but not the labels. /ℇsquilo 08:55, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Esquilo, that the claim instance of (P31) business (Q4830453) looks nonsensically in Russian at least. --Infovarius (talk) 11:15, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

@Infovarius: Then we should find what Russian word describes the concept best starting from the English description and article, because the Wikidata item is modeled after them. --S.K. (talk) 06:46, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Don't be Anglocentric, many users were using commercial organization (Q21980538) or company (Q783794) before they were voluntarily changed to business (Q4830453). And these actions seem disaster for me. --Infovarius (talk) 17:27, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

@Infovarius: I'm not Anglocentric at all, sorry. But I believe in precisely defining a a term and then see, if an article in a particular language fits that definition. The problem with the old interwikis and the resulting wikidata items is, that they were often put together without that and instead word translations or vague similarities were used. I will make a new section where I will consolidate what all related items are and how they differ from each other. Hope this can clear up confusion. --S.K. (talk) 17:27, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Defined as a legal term in all EU languages in https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:31993R0696 --Alan ffm (talk) 20:38, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

trading business (Handelsgewerbe) (Q1489930) is organism (Q7239)?

Now we have: trading business (Handelsgewerbe) (Q1489930)->company (Q783794)->juridical person (Q155076)->legal person (Q3778211)->subject (Q830077)->sentient being (Q15276545)->organism (Q7239) --Fractaler (talk) 14:19, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Removed subclass economic unit (Q3563237)

Because economic unit (Q3563237) has problematic superclasses; that item seems to be focused on the term as a term not as an actual thing. And this item is a subclass of the thing, but certainly not of the term. JesseW (talk) 01:05, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

economic unit (Q3563237) "is a" term but not a "subclass of" term so I don't see an error. One can also consider economic entity (Q12569864) as a class. --Infovarius (talk) 21:43, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

economic entity (Q12569864) has acceptable superclasses (specifically, it doesn't have any :-) ), so I've added that. The problem with economic unit (Q3563237) is that it is (indirectly) a subclass of abstract entity (Q7048977) which is very much not the case for many instances of this item (or its subclasses)! I noticed that

⟨ economic entity (Q12569864)    ⟩ different from (P1889) ⟨ economic unit (Q3563237)    ⟩

exists, but lacks any clarification about what the intended distinction is. If you have a better sense of that, please add it. And thanks for commenting on these changes; I'm glad to have more people looking at them. JesseW (talk) 23:29, 2 August 2022 (UTC)