Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license.
Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat.
We can research this topic together.
:::::You are misrepresenting ]. It does not state the brand must not meaningfully exist but the subject must not meaningfully exist. ] is unambiguous on the point and even gives a closely identical example of the discontinued PDP-10 as to correct tense usage. The PDP-10 has been out of production for decades (far longer than philishave) but the MOS unambiguously requires present tense.
:::::You are misrepresenting ]. It does not state the brand must not meaningfully exist but the subject must not meaningfully exist. ] is unambiguous on the point and even gives a closely identical example of the discontinued PDP-10 as to correct tense usage. The PDP-10 has been out of production for decades (far longer than philishave) but the MOS unambiguously requires present tense.
:::::To edit against the manual of style is disruptive editing and requires ''you'' to obtain a consensus on the talk page to do so (unlikely). I do not require talk page consensus to follow the manual of style. ] (]) 12:52, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
:::::To edit against the manual of style is disruptive editing and requires ''you'' to obtain a consensus on the talk page to do so (unlikely). I do not require talk page consensus to follow the manual of style.
:::::Oh and Steelbeard1 has neither contributed to any discussion nor edited on the point since my response to him above so it would appear, on the surface, that he has accepted the point. ] (]) 12:52, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Misplaced Pages. 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
The article talks about the phasing out of the phillips namimg, but this is not the case in the rest of the world, where that branding is still used. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.79.205.232 (talk) 14:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
You misread the article. The American name was "Norelco". The present American name is "Philips Norelco." The co-branding is to allow the phaseout of the "Norelco" name in favour of the "Philips" name. Now do you get it? Steelbeard1 (talk) 14:37, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Philishave is a discontinued brand
Because Philishave is a discontinued brand, articles about discontinued brands are given in the past tense. Pontiac cars are still being driven, but because Pontiac is a discontinued automotive brand, that is given on its Misplaced Pages article in the past tense. Steelbeard1 (talk) 14:38, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
No! Read MOS:TENSE. If the product still meaningfully exists, then present tense is compulsory. Philishave branded razors unquestionably still exist therefore Philishave is (still) a brand that appears on many razors that exist in the world. The manual of style is compulsory policy for editing articles. Going against it is disruptive editing and blockable. 86.146.209.237 (talk) 17:32, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
While it's true that the brand being discontinued does not put it into past tense, I do not see how it can still meaningfully exist fourteen years later. If they're still receiving official support, or if they're part of, for example, a notable current-run TV series, then it could be. Jerod Lycett (talk) 00:27, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Philishave spares and parts are still available Google. The razors must therefore exist to require such spares and parts. MOS:TENSE makes no mention of being in receipt of official support or part of any TV series. The only criterion given is that they have to exist. That criterion is met. 86.146.209.237 (talk) 12:34, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
MOS:TENSE states that the brand itself has to meaningfully exist. It does not. Therefore past tense. Both Steelbeard1 and I agree on that, so either open an RFC or realize that the consensus is not with you. Jerod Lycett (talk) 20:15, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
You are misrepresenting MOS:TENSE. It does not state the brand must not meaningfully exist but the subject must not meaningfully exist. MOS:TENSE is unambiguous on the point and even gives a closely identical example of the discontinued PDP-10 as to correct tense usage. The PDP-10 has been out of production for decades (far longer than philishave) but the MOS unambiguously requires present tense.
To edit against the manual of style is disruptive editing and requires you to obtain a consensus on the talk page to do so (unlikely). I do not require talk page consensus to follow the manual of style.
Oh and Steelbeard1 has neither contributed to any discussion nor edited on the point since my response to him above so it would appear, on the surface, that he has accepted the point. 86.146.209.237 (talk) 12:52, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=small}