Template talk:Finance links

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Finance links template.

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

Hoover's ID field

The Hoover's ID needs to be modified somehow to accommodate for the fact that Hoover's doesn't use links in the manner described in the Template documentation anymore. Thus, http://www.hoovers.com/u.s.-robotics/--ID__101968--/free-co-factsheet.xhtml now redirects to http://www.hoovers.com/company-information/cs/company-profile.US_Robotics_Corporation.12b5e6ee5bee0096.html and the new identification string for U.S. Robotics is 12b5e6ee5bee0096. For Exxon Mobil the ID is now 07cc70931047bfd5, for JP Morgan it's 847754f4ce985207, and for SodaStream International it's ed2c1cb99cb6aa88.—Biosketch (talk) 20:09, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I came here because of the same issue. I was going to add this template to Novavax, Inc., but I don't even know where the profile would be in their prior link format. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 19:56, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Bloomberg to the template

Hi, I am the deputy managing editor for Bloomberg Digital and would like to request a change to the Finance links template on Wikipedia.

The template documentation says that Bloomberg is included in the template, but that the actual template code has no parameter or query for Bloomberg.

We were hoping you can amend the template to include this:

http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/{{{symbol}}}:US Bloomberg]}}

This would mean that if the symbol was MSFT, the Bloomberg link generated will be http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/MSFT:US

Please let me know if adding this query and parameter to the template is possible.

Thanks,

Katieboyce (talk) 18:03, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'd like to assist Bloomberg in getting some eyes on this request, as they contacted the WMF for guidance. To be clear, neither myself, Wikipedia Library, nor WMF has any opinion on this suggestion. (Although I don't see anything wrong with it either). Thanks for taking a look UnitedStatesian, Aomarks, Ɱ, Mendaliv or Lam-ang. Best, Jake Ocaasi (WMF) (talk) 17:02, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just need to sync from sandbox, someone already worked on this. Lam-ang (talk) 17:43, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Lam-ang! Is there any objection to User:Katieboyce making this change herself? Being mindful of coi... Cheers, Jake Ocaasi (WMF) (talk) 20:29, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just pinging one more time. I think given the COI issues and template complexity, Bloomberg would rather not make the change themselves if possible, even if it's uncontroversial and effectively already done. Could UnitedStatesian, Aomarks, Ɱ, Mendaliv or Lam-ang please incorporate the Bloomberg addition from the sandbox? Thanks and cheers, Jake Ocaasi (WMF) (talk) 22:47, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Added with this edit. --Lam-ang (talk) 00:21, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Lam-ang! Ocaasi (WMF) (talk) 00:11, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yahoo field

I've changed the doc for the yahoo field to match what the template actually does. The behavior seems very unhelpful, and seems like a bug to me. I suspect some of the other fields behave the same way (google?) but have not tested them. Kendall-K1 (talk) 22:03, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hoover's

It seems Hoover's is down, I get Access Denied. Is it only me? If not, should we remove it from the template? Maxime Vernier (talk) 10:53, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's down, but it has gone subscription, so we should remove it. "The record you’re looking for may be part of our subscription database. We have over 85 million companies in our database and would love to get you access to what you need." Kendall-K1 (talk) 13:50, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It turns out the field doc was correct but the example was wrong. I fixed it. Kendall-K1 (talk) 14:03, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hoover's is now "Subscription required" ???

Problem

I did what the field documentation said to add the Hoover's ID to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chicago_Bridge_%26_Iron_Company&oldid=781233216#External_links .

I got this error message on the returned web page http://www.hoovers.com/we-can-help.html :

Hey There!

The record you’re looking for may be part of our subscription database. We have over 85 million companies in our database and would love to get you access to what you need.

If you need assistance, please fill out the form below to get a free trial of our subscription product. You can also chat or call (866) 704-3373 to get started.

— Lentower (talk) 23:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Possible solutions

Assuming I followed the instructions for this field properly, I see these solutions. Any change would need documenting.

put Hoover's last with a syntax like ... "* Hoovers (Subscription require)"
add an alternative field |hoovers-by-name= which would return the search on a company's name. If possible, something should be done at template generation to handle an error page being returned.
deprecate the field, returning nothing for existing use.

Other possible solutions? — Lentower (talk) 23:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestion is to deprecate the field, since so little info. is there. If I don't hear any strong objections in the next few days, I'll proceed. UnitedStatesian (talk) 12:47, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and deprecated it. UnitedStatesian (talk) 01:40, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@UnitedStatesian: Can the Hoover's field be added back? It seems to be working completely fine for a long time now, the info contained is similar to Bloomberg's. It was also added to Wikidata as well (D&B Hoovers company profile (P5232)) and has been linked to companies with no issues. Gotitbro (talk) 11:38, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Gotitbro:: should be no problem; can you post here a sample Hoovers link that the template would return? Thanks! UnitedStatesian (talk) 22:12, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@UnitedStatesian: From the above Wikidata link, the Hoover's URL for Vivaldi Technologies: http://www.hoovers.com/company-information/cs/company-profile.776cc66357fe4df3.html. The format is already correctly there on the sandbox just needs to be added to the temp. Gotitbro (talk) 22:34, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Gotitbro: That hoovers URL gives a Http 500 error; am I missing something? UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:38, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@UnitedStatesian: My bad provided the wrong URL, this should work http://www.hoovers.com/company-information/cs/company-profile.vivaldi_technologies_as.776cc66357fe4df3.html Gotitbro (talk) 02:51, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Gotitbro: So in the Template at the bottom of the Vivaldi Technologies page, the editor would have to put "vivaldi_technologies_as.776cc66357fe4df3" next to the hoovers tag in order for it to return a good URL? I think that is VERY unlikely to work (not like all the other tags, where all you need to know is the symbol). I think we should leave it deprecated until Hoovers has a more user-friendly URL construction. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:16, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@UnitedStatesian: It works fine if we're just trying to link companies to different databases. Hoover's is a highly respected database and its D-U-N-S numbers for companies are used by many organizations such as Apple Inc. (which requires companies to have one if they want to publish to iTunes) and even by the US government for various purposes. Its a valuable resource and I think it should be included in the template; it has been on the template for a long time. Gotitbro (talk) 03:30, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Workaround asthis template handles neither multiple ticker symbols nor non-US exchanges.

This template doesn't handle multiple ticker symbols for different kinds of stock, or ticker symbols on non-US exchanged. E.g. Toshiba, which has both kinds of symbols, where I did this workaround: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Toshiba&oldid=781346241#External_links — Lentower (talk) 17:57, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think that is a mess. The only symbol in the infobox at the top is the TYO symbol, which is all there should be finance links for. UnitedStatesian (talk) 03:20, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stockrow?

I removed the undiscussed add of Stockrow. Is it reliable? Any such changes should be discussed here first, and added to the documentation. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:01, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removing an extraneous bullet?

Greetings and felicitations. In

Business data for EarthLink, Inc.:
- SEC filings

I see an extraneous bullet before the Reuters link. Is there a way to remove that? DocWatson42 (talk) 08:02, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since I no longer see an extraneous bullet, I withdraw the request. —DocWatson42 (talk) 01:33, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 7 October 2018

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Request by Adrian Facini, the Head of Product at the Investors Exchange (IEX), to add "IEX Stocks" to the list of the Finance links. Example: IEX Stocks

The IEX Stocks page for a security provides price charts, real-time pricing, real-time quotes, real-time trades, opening trade, closing trade, company information, earnings, dividends, analysts, estimates, news, peer comparisons, etc. This information is sourced from high quality sources as well as the exchange itself. IEX Stocks would be the only Finance link that provides data in real-time from a national securities exchange.

Request to add the following to the Finance links template: {{#if:{{{iex|}}}| [https://iextrading.com/apps/stocks/{{{iex}}} IEX Stocks]}}

Adrian.facini (talk) 04:03, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Given the COI nature of this request and the fact it is being proposed for a template page, please provide consensus for this edit request. Such consensus can be demonstrated by starting and completing a discussion at WP:COIN. --Izno (talk) 13:08, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Nasdaq to the Template

Hi, I'm hoping we can add Nasdaq links, e.g.

https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/MSFT

The information provided by Nasdaq is high quality, accurate, granular, and covers all US-listed securities, including those listed on other exchanges (e.g. NYSE, AMEX). This source has a number of data not represented in Yahoo and Google finance, including competitor analysis and additional filtering for stock options.

No addition effort would be required to support Nasdaq tickers. Any ticker used for a Bloomberg link (https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/MSFT:US) would work with Nasdaq as well.

DenverCoder9 (talk) 23:25, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 28 April 2019

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Add the following link to the end of the list:

{{#if:{{{nasdaq|}}}|
* [https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/{{{nasdaq}}} Nasdaq]}}

DenverCoder9 (talk) 23:42, 28 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the code to Template:Finance links/sandbox and a test to Template:Finance links/testcases. I don't think this is likely to be controversial, so if all looks okay I can make the change. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:06, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Q746371 has not yet returned to this request, so I have deployed. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:06, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies--I agree, this is great, thank you! (talk) December 28th — Preceding undated comment added 19:58, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Financial Times.

I've worked out the code for how to add. FT.com the Financial Times which does have several global markets.

|{{#if:{{{ft|}}}|[https://markets.ft.com/data/equities/tearsheet/summary?s={{{ft}}} Financial Times]}}

Anybody have objections to having this source added? It works by "

|ft = MSFT:NSQ

" for example. (For Microsoft.) It is on the sandbox right now.

CaribDigita (talk) 02:27, 27 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Google Finance

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Google discontinued Google Finance service. Should be removed from template.--110.165.189.123 (talk) 23:07, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not done google finance appears to have merged in to a custom google finance search and data result - meaning these links could still be useful for readers. — xaosflux ^Talk 17:19, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Stockrow to the template

Hi, would it be possible to add links to stockrow.com, for example: https://stockrow.com/INTC

Data is accurate, there are real-time quotes and 10 years worth of financial data. All publicly traded US companies and ADRs are there so all tickers that work with other websites will work there as well.

Template-protected edit request on 25 March 2020

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Add this link at the end of the list:

|{{#if:{{{stockrow|}}}|[https://stockrow.com/{{{stockrow}}} Stockrow]}}

Ryakh (talk) 21:03, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:47, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonesey95: Sorry for messing this up a bit. Thanks for the pointers. I've read through consensus article yet I am a bit unsure how I should proceed with that. Can this topic be a consensus building vehicle? If not should I start a new discussion? Here on this talk page or somewhere else? In case this topic can be used to achieve consensus should I just leave it as is and wait for more editors to join discussion? Thanks and sorry again for asking stupid questions. Ryakh (talk) 13:09, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion would typically happen here. I can think of two questions. We have six options today; does adding Stockrow provide information that is not available via those other options? Is Stockrow a reliable, neutral source? You or other editors may have other questions. – Jonesey95 (talk) 16:32, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonesey95: Thanks for clarifying that! I'll go ahead and try to answer your questions if that's OK. Big thing that is different is that Stockrow provides 10 years worth of financial data for quarterly, TTM and annual metrics (other sites provide 4 most recent years, 4 last quarters and one last TTM value at most), it has more financial metrics and ratios available compared to other 5. This one is personal preference but the way Stockrow organizes data is much more appealing to me and easier to read compared to other 5. SEC filings (6th option) have all that data but getting to the data in a form that Stockrow offers means browsing them one by one and composing a dataset manually. As far as data quality goes I've cross checked handful of large companies (AAPL, INTL, MSFT, TSLA, NVDA, V, MA as well as few smaller ones like ANET,TEAM) with Yahoo! Finance, Morningstar and SEC filings and as far as I can tell data on Stockrow is as accurate as it can be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryakh (talk • contribs) 20:21, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jonesey95: Sorry for pinging you again; it's been over three weeks now. Is there anything that can be done to speed things up? Maybe asking for a peer review (or something similar)? I still think this could be a valuable addition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryakh (talk • contribs) 17:23, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

with the fear of messing this up again (sorry in advance) I am going to re-activate this edit request to drive more attention to it to help with consensus building process as it's been two months since my initial request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryakh (talk • contribs) 20:25, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ryakh, please remember to sign your posts. Because you didn't do so, neither of your attempts at pinging Jonesey95 actually succeeded. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:39, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a note, there are 15 page watchers and only 1k uses of this template. I don't think there's going to be much in the way of consensus-building here. The arguments made above seem reasonable, so I'll add it to the list. Primefac (talk) 15:59, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stockrow (and standard for adds more generally)

Hey all, I reverted the add of Stockrow; per WP:BRD, now is the time for discussion. Even though this template is only used 1k times, I think we need to have a two-fold standard for adds: 1) Is the data source a highly reliable, viable entity. Being accurate today is fine; we have to be confident the entity will be accurate for a long time to come. And 2) Does the source add anything that the other already existing sources do not have. I think stockrow fails on both counts. On 1), unlike all the other sources, there is not even a Stockrow article. On 2) I don't see anything that the source gives that is not already available in the other sources. Certainly could be convinced otherwise, but for now I don't think we have consensus for this add. I'd also note that User:Ryakh is a single-purpose account (Contributions). Pinging @Ryakh:, @Jonesey95: and @Primefac: so they can weigh in. UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:02, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since I was asked: I have no opinion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:44, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Same here; I just saw a silent consensus. Primefac (talk) 15:19, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Updated for private companies

The Google, Yahoo, Bloomberg and Reuters links no longer work for private companies, only for the public ones. In certain cases, the sec_cik does work for private companies. I've updated the instructions. Funandtrvl (talk) 04:19, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nasdaq URL is outdated

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

https://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/ -- Nasdaq URL for ticker symbol is outdated, should be: https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/ -- Antoine Legrand (talk) 09:06, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done firefly ( t · c ) 10:44, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Removing NASDAQ

I am WP:BOLDly removing the Nasdaq link. Three reasons: 1) Nasdaq provides nothing that is not provided by the other sources. 2) Nasdaq has no support for non-US-listed companies, so it reinforces US-centered bias. 3) The links are much less stable, as the above edit request shows. Best, UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:41, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ticker problems for Google Finance lookup

Anyone know why the Google Finance (GF) ticker lookup doesn't work for Dow Inc. (DOW) and Paramount Global (PARA)? I've tried using DOW:NYSE and PARA:NASDAQ in the "Google =" entry for the template but still displays incorrect quote. Any help would be appreciated. Ksu6500 (talk) 19:13, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I know I tried NYSE:DOW and NASDAQ:PARA a few days ago and they didn't work. Try today and they work. I guess we'll see if they continue working. Ksu6500 (talk) 20:50, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ksu6500 Thanks as always for your good work here and elsewhere. I just now had to change the Google url in this template to get it to work, but now Google is requiring the exchange be appended in order for the ticker to work. So we need to go through manually and exchanges to all the Google tickers. Any help you can give would be appreciated. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:40, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So what, we'll now need to add the exchange like NYSE:DOW and NASDAQ:PARA manually to all the thousands of entries? That's unfortunate.

I can see going down the list of S&P 500 companies that most don't work for GF. I guess I can start with the S&P 500 or Russell 1000 and go from there but it will likely take a few weeks. Let me know since most on the S&P 500 and S&P 400 are on the Russell 1000. Ksu6500 (talk) 00:34, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ksu6500Yes, unfortunate. Also, I would add the exchange at the end, so DOW:NYSE and PARA:NASDAQ instead; though either order will works, having the exchange at the end is the GF standard (and is consistent with Bloomberg, Reuters and Yahoo non-US. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:09, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello User:UnitedStatesian, it looks like the earlier version (https://www.google.com/finance?q=xxx) is working. I picked User:Ksu6500's examples trying DOW:NYSE and PARA:NASDAQ, and they work with the original version. So, is the change (to https://www.google.com/finance/quote/xxx) really needed? Ptrnext (talk) 01:03, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ptrnext: thanks for the question; since Google redirects the old version to the new version, I think the change makes sense, since we do not know how long Google's redirect will continue to work. Best, UnitedStatesian (talk) 01:42, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@UnitedStatesian: Sure, the change does make sense, but I'm thinking about the burden of having to fix GF links on many company pages, when the previous version was working just as fine. It seems to me it would make more sense to update the link when the re-direct is taken off/no longer works. I assume have re-directs are OK (the SEC one does a redirect too when CIK is used) Ptrnext (talk) 02:00, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ptrnext All the GF links still need to be fixed to add the exchange, unfortunately, whether we use the old version or the new version. If the google= value only has the ticker, neither link will work any more. Best, UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:05, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Most of NASDAQ ones work with the old version (i.e. with only the ticker). Do you have some examples? Ptrnext (talk) 02:08, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ptrnext I went to the Adobe Inc. article and clicked on the GF link at the bottom (ADBE ticker, no exchange); the resulting Google page says "We couldn't find any match for your search. Did you mean?" followed by a list of ADBE tickers on different exchanges, only some of which are Adobe Inc. I am using Firefox and not logged into Google; what behavior do you get? UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:13, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@UnitedStatesian: I see the same message as you, but that is because the GF template is now using the new link (non-redirect version). The old link would still work without the exchange (https://www.google.com/finance?q=ADBE) Ptrnext (talk) 02:16, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But not universally: https://www.google.com/finance?q=Y, for Alleghany Corp., does not work. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, but it's easier to just update the GF ticker for these outliers (with the old version), than having to update every GF ticker (with the new version). Ptrnext (talk) 02:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@UnitedStatesian You need to change the template back to the original. Unless GF now requires the exchange for ALL ticker lookups then the original is the correct one. Any outliers that don't work correctly can be fixed manually when someone comes across it. Ksu6500 (talk) 19:58, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ksu6500, @Ptrnext: google finance link changed back. Thanks to both of you for all your help checking/testing, and of course I will continue to monitor. Best, UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:03, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! @UnitedStatesian @Ksu6500 I'll be on the lookout for the outliers — appear to be (some) single character tickers and other tickers that have resemblance to a keyword/index (e.g., IT, IP, NET, DOW, etc.) — and fix those that aren't already. Ptrnext (talk) 20:36, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@UnitedStatesian @Ptrnext GF does seem to work most of the time but Allstate will only work with NYSE:ALL instead of the preferred ALL:NYSE. I'll also keep looking for outliers to correct and make sure to add any new ones with Ticker:Exchange format (as long as it works). Thanks. Ksu6500 (talk) 01:48, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ksu6500, UnitedStatesian: yeah, I came across Agilent that had the same issue. Also, noticed that GOOGL:NASDAQ would open the quote for NDAQ:NASDAQ instead! NASDAQ:GOOGL or (just GOOGL) would work correctly. Ptrnext (talk) 06:31, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could this be upgraded to an international tool? Suggestion

Could this be updated to a more international tool? My idea. Namely, for example when you goto a geographic article anywhere in the world on Wikipedia and click on the coordinates it takes you to a tool to view the coordinates on any number of websites the community comes up with. Could this template here be broad-end out the same way? For example if I goto Berlin and click on the coordinates of Berlin it takes me to: * [1] Instead, the user can select from a number of reputable options. Can this have a similar page with say SEC, SEDAR, DandB, Marketwatch, Hoovers, Google, and other options around the world? I had added Bloomberg a while back, but could this template be upgraded fully? I'm thinking for example it could goto the relevent stock exchanges also using either:

A: The standard ISO-3166 code:

So for example CA:TSX:Stock ticker would be Canada, TSX exchange, and then stock ticker.

DE:DAX:Stock ticker would be Germany, DAX exchange, and then the stock ticker.

-Else-

B: The standard ISO 10383 code:

So for example the Japanese JSE under the ISO-10383 'Market Identifier Code' is : "XJPX" and could be followed by 'stock ticker'

The Singaporean SE under the ISO-10383 'Market Identifier Code' is : "XSES" and could be followed by 'stock ticker'

CaribDigita (talk) 00:37, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CaribDigita, there is an ISIN toolforge that exists which can be expanded or improved per your suggestions. And leave the current finance template as is. Do you see any reason to have a separate toolforge (as a finance template replacement)? Ptrnext (talk) 20:40, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@CaribDigita, @Ptrnext, yes, many of the public company articles have the ISIN= parameter within the {{Infobox company}}, which links directly to the toolforge. And all of the current parameters within {{finance links}} support companies listed on non-US exchanges; see Template:Finance links#Non-U.S. Public company for an example. UnitedStatesian (talk) 12:16, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not use name param unless necessary?

@UnitedStatesian: Hey, I had a question about the name param in this template. I noticed if the param is not present the page name will automatically be used. Which is fine. Should we follow that procedure most of the time? Or should we be using the full, legal company name in the name field of the company infobox? My preference at least for any new companies would be to not use the param and default to page name (one less field to mess up). What do you think? Ksu6500 (talk) 18:52, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ksu6500: Thanks for the question; I personally do think there is value to having it; note that both the first, bolded mention of the company in the lead paragraph, and the name= parameter in the {{Infobox company}} should be the full legal name, and so I think using the parameter here is similarly valuable. But that's just my personal view, and if you feel differently that is of course fine. UnitedStatesian (talk) 01:47, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal: Temporarily deprecate the google parameter

Given the unpredictable behavior (when is the exchange needed, and if it is needed, does it have to come before or after the ticker), I propose we edit the template to temporarily deprecate the parameter (while leaving it on every article, so when we "undeprecate," it will work again). As it stands we have to manually check each time it is used, and if it doesn't work, reedit the page to try another combination. On top of this, there is nothing I see on GF that is not provided by the other links, so the users shouldn't miss anything while google sorts it out.

Support as proposer. UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:28, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]