Talk:Beneficial ownership

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Beneficial ownership article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

What is beneficial ownership of a state registered business i.e., Corp, LLC, trust, non-profit...?

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Beneficial ownership. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070531213115/http://www.law.uc.edu:80/CCL/34ActRls/rule13d-3.html to http://www.law.uc.edu/CCL/34ActRls/rule13d-3.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:17, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

merge proposal[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To merge Beneficial owner into Beneficial ownership on grounds of context, overlap and short text. Klbrain (talk) 13:59, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to merge Beneficial owner into Beneficial ownership. Clearly the same concept. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 12:57, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, but believe we need a lawyer to sort this out. Beneficial owner addresses copyright issues, whereas Beneficial ownership addresses securities. Moreover, in the latter article, paragraphs 1 and 3 contradict each other. I believe that in regard to securities, the fact that custody is recorded in the street name of the broker or custodian is irrelevant to ownership. We need to clear these up. WikiDorset (talk) 00:34, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support; clearly the same concept; so, merge for reason of duplication. I suggest merging to Beneficial ownership as the better-developed article, and the one that has an international perspective. Klbrain (talk) 00:10, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I firmly agree with the merger, and mildly incline to agree with merging "Beneficial owner" into "Beneficial ownership" rather than vice-versa for the reason given by Klbrain. And we do not need a lawyer to sort this out; 'beneficial owner' is used routinely in securities.Mikalra (talk) 15:39, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support merge. These articles are clearly talking about the same thing. "Beneficial ownership" should be the target article. It's a much more comprehensive and well-written article than the other one. Joyous! | Talk 04:36, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Same topic. --Mormegil (talk) 12:44, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- We have a 5-1 vote in favor of the merger. I'm unfamiliar with the procedure: when do we declare the motion carried, and who can and will execute the merger?Mikalra (talk) 23:55, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say this indicates consensus. Anyone can carry out the merge. I don't have enough knowledge of the article's topic to do a decent job, I don't think. Joyous! | Talk 00:39, 16 December 2022 (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.

Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 13:59, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]