Talk:TJ Maxx/Archives/2017
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
T.K. Maxx- formerly a redirect to T.J. Maxx- was unilaterally split into its own article by anonymous User:172.89.78.75 with no discussion. I'd like to debate this questionable decision.
The rationale appears to be based upon quasi-legal over-interpretion of the fact that the parent company lists them separately here.
Yes, we know that they use marginally-different names in different countries... but that in itself doesn't demonstrate they're (legally) "separate subsidiaries". Even if they were, it'd still have to justify having separate articles. Many companies have subsidiaries operating in various regions (e.g. Arbitrary Corp., Arbitrary Europe Ltd., Arbitrary Australia Pty., etc. etc.) that we don't do this for.
The minor variation in name is accepted (by the articles themselves) to be for avoidance of confusion; there doesn't appear to be any clear distinction between the business model or corporate identity otherwise.
Ubcule (talk) 16:12, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
- Not only are they separate divisions, TJ Maxx operates only in the US, while TK Maxx operates in Europe. TJ Maxx is in the Marmaxx (Marshalls/TJ Maxx) division, while TK Maxx is part of TJX Europe. There is actually a better case for merging Marshalls and TJ Maxx articles together as they actually operate under the same division. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:2407:9C00:25D0:374:6C77:1160 (talk) 09:40, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
- The reason given for break out was that here they list them separately. I am not so sure that is a good enough rationale because Marshall's is listed in two different places. The real question is, do we have an RS that says its the same entity and just a different name in a different country because of XYZ. - GalatzTalk 14:19, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
- Looking quickly at the two articles, there doesn't seem to be a lot of overlap. So I'd say don't merge. Whether they are legally part of the same entity ot not doesn't seem important. Pol098 (talk) 13:35, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
- Merge, it's the same business, just a different name in different countries besides the US. We can find a way to add all the TK Maxx information into TJ Maxx very easily, not that hard. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:5C27:2F31:29B9:AAC1 (talk) 23:45, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
- Looking quickly at the two articles, there doesn't seem to be a lot of overlap. So I'd say don't merge. Whether they are legally part of the same entity ot not doesn't seem important. Pol098 (talk) 13:35, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
- The reason given for break out was that here they list them separately. I am not so sure that is a good enough rationale because Marshall's is listed in two different places. The real question is, do we have an RS that says its the same entity and just a different name in a different country because of XYZ. - GalatzTalk 14:19, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
- Strongly oppose: readers in the UK will have no idea that TJ Maxx is anything to do with TK Maxx. I didn't until today. Why choose to do this when the TK Maxx page is fine? –Sb2001 talk page 21:34, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose: While we do merge national subsidiary articles sometimes, we do not do it universally, and not when confusion is likely to result. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 23:20, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:T.K. Maxx which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:14, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
- The record of that discussion is now at Talk:TK Maxx. —BarrelProof (talk) 14:46, 24 August 2017 (UTC)