This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The contents of the Didi Dache page were merged into DiDi on 15 December 2017. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
The result of the move request was: move the page to DiDi (company), per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 00:47, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Didi Chuxing →
DiDi (service) – Per
WP:COMMONNAME,
WP:TRANSLITERATE and
WP:TITLETM. Plus, the service is now using DiDi as its name for international markets. See its
official English website, which calls itself by just DiDi. Its app in the
App Store and
Play Store is also just DiDi for international markets. Didi Chuxing is undoubtedly a good name, but Chuxing is a hard to understand for English readers as it is Chinese pinyin. Welcome for discussion. Cheers.
Wefk423 (
talk) 17:42, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
The BBC and NYT have been using the name Didi Chuxing for two years [2] [3] so I added it to the altenative names. NYT has some use of just Didi but neither use the stylised DiDi, which the article is currently titled. It seems the WP:COMMONNAME may be Didi Chuxing (stylised DiDi). Widefox; talk 11:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
...English language reliable sources...) . The move discussion above isn't very enlightening or numerous. Widefox; talk 17:09, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Article titles should be recognizable to readers, unambiguous, and consistent with usage in reliable English-language sources(emphasis own) Ping others User:Timmyshin User:Ita140188 Widefox; talk 17:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
I appreciate your edit on adding it into the article lead. Cheers!). You also mentioned WSJ has used their full, official name "Didi Chuxing Technology Co.", but that does not mean it could qualify as a WP:COMMONNAME reason. As for the company profile, I believe it refers to the company in China, rather than the company that handles their international services. If you open their international website ( https://www.didiglobal.com), it will see that the official company name is Beijing Xiaoju Technology Co, Ltd. – Wefk423 ( talk) 17:46, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
While common names are generally preferred over official names as article titles(and the app, subsids, and other irrelevancies are not the company), and COMMONNAMES policy. See also Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies) . Widefox; talk 00:09, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to DiDi. There is no consensus to move back to the longer title Didi Chuxing. Claims that it meets NATURALDIS were offset by claims that this name refers only to the Chinese market, and worldwide the "Didi Chuxing" name is an official name rather than a common name. However, there is a consensus that straight DiDi is better than the current title, as it differs from other Didi entries in capitalisation, and also satisfies NATURALDIS. — Amakuru ( talk) 08:26, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
DiDi (company) →
Didi Chuxing – Revert bad move, flawed per above using the stylised (
WP:OFFICIALNAMES) camelcase version in the face of
WP:COMMONNAME, which is against policy/MOS as not dominant in sources (both all mentioned above, and all in article) per
MOS:CAMELCASE ..reflects general usage..
.
Widefox;
talk 17:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC) --Relisting.
Andrewa (
talk) 20:30, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
..reflects general usage and makes the trademark more readable..- it is not dominant in sources (see below) - for example only 2/100 article sources use camelcase (and one is a PR), and does not make more readable as per the examples there of compound nouns ie not like
OxyContin,
PlayStation
Whenever possible, common usagetherefore "Didi Chuxing" is preferred for disambiguation
Chinese group Didi Chuxing, didi-labs about
ABOUT DIDI CHUXING...DiDi is a ride-sharing platform, CNBC
Didi Chuxing, the Chinese ride-sharing giant that has big ambitions for international expansionCrunchbase
Didi Chuxing ...Also Known As Didi, [8] primary also has
Udacity, Didi Chuxing want to give you $100,000 ...The Verge
Didi Chuxing, the Chinese ride-hail behemoth, plans to expand to Mexico ...It would be the company’s first international expansion...Didi.. so no, by primary and secondary sources "Didi Chuxing" is used in international context, not just China. Widefox; talk 10:37, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
... and WSJ has full name "Didi Chuxing Technology Co.". Cheers. – Wefk423 ( talk) 18:51, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Uber Technologies Inc. (doing business as Uber), Amazon (company)
Amazon.com, Inc., doing business as Amazon(ie with trade name). The apps, and geographically named services are not to be conflated. This is English WP too. Widefox; talk 21:39, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
If you open their international website ( https://www.didiglobal.com), it will see that the official company name is Beijing Xiaoju Technology Co, Ltd. The company name you mentioned from WSJ is the one handling Chinese markets, we are not sure whether it is the parent company of all services. The situation is different than the companies you gave (Amazon and Uber), as DiDi has two different common names for different markets. – Wefk423 ( talk) 12:12, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Bad moves should be reverted. It is that simple.No, it's not. You kept emphasising that it was a bad move and it should be reverted to Didi Chuxing, but me and several editors have repeatedly pointed out that the name that appeared on the sources you listed here (Didi Chuxing) refers only to the service in Mainland China, and not the other numbers of market. Those sources used Didi in the title for a reason, it's been used as common name, not "
sometimes use "Didi" for short". Didi Chuxing is undoubtedly not a suitable name for a service that is available in different countries with a different name. For overseas countries that always used DiDi as common name to refer to the service, using Didi Chuxing is confusing to them. Is this an article only referring to the service in China, and not their hometown or country? – Wefk423 ( talk) 16:40, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
I suggest that if you don't know the name of the company, then you should refrain from moving the company to a different nameI'm here to once again make it clear to you. The move request was a proposal for discussion, and was moved per consensus. You make it seem like I have moved the article without making any discussion. Please refrain from persistently putting the blame of "bad move" to me. I'm asking nicely. – Wefk423 ( talk) 16:45, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
The company name you mentioned from WSJ is the one handling Chinese markets, we are not sure whether it is the parent company of all services.. Also, you mentioned
Didi Chuxing for short, or Didi for ambiguously short. No. Didi Chuxing is for China markets, DiDi is for all international markets. It has been mentioned by me and other editors many times. – Wefk423 ( talk) 16:40, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Natural disambiguation that is unambiguous, commonly used, and clear is generally preferable to parenthetical disambiguation. In this case, the natural disambiguation for this article is the company's official name, "Didi Chuxing", which is preferable to "Didi (company)". The company may have chosen to use the "DiDi" name in isolation for their international marketing, but "Didi Chuxing" remains the better title for this article. Λυδ α cιτγ 08:24, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
"didi" ride service -chuxing
gives 3 million results
[12], while "didi chuxing" ride service
gives only 378,000 results
[13] --
Ita140188 (
talk) 08:35, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Whenever possible, common usagetherefore "Didi Chuxing" is preferred for disambiguation) 3. even the bad move proponent (above) claims the lowercase is the commonname, invalidating the bad move rational. Widefox; talk 16:48, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
even the bad move proponent (above) claims the lowercase is the commonname, invalidating the bad move rational?? That does not mean that Didi Chuxing is suitable. It is not the common name and MOS:CAMELCASE also stated
Trademarks in "CamelCase" are a judgment call; the style may be used where it reflects general usage and makes the trademark more readable., this is why we have discussed the possiblity of moving to DiDi, the trademark name from DiDi. – Wefk423 ( talk) 16:57, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
general usagenot editors desire. Usage in RS is clear = not used. Period. Widefox; talk 17:18, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
the style may be used where it reflects general usagewhere "DiDi" camelcase is not used in any WP:RS above, so should not be used for the name or the article apart from the stylised mention in the lead. Widefox; talk 16:36, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
DiDi does not affect the CamelCase-ness of that title, as favored by Simonm223, then that move would not violate MOS:CAMELCASE, as you claim it would. -- В²C ☎ 23:40, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
If I were to close this now, I'd need to dscard much (perhaps most) of the above for various reasons... blatantly contrary to policy, personal opinion only, based on primary sources (see also the essay at wp:official names for more on that). Suggest the supporters in particular might try to clarify the reasons for their support.
And as part of this, is the stylised DiDi and the proposed natural disambiguation of Didi really the best possible proposal? Neither of these questions have been well addressed above.
That latest !vote, for example, appeals to WP:IDENTITY, presumably believing that it isn't clear which is most used (see the link they gave). That claim needs justification; Just name-dropping the MOS means nothing. In fact, none of their four arguments stand up to scrutiny, so I'd simply discard that !vote, and several others. Andrewa ( talk) 21:44, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
When there is another term (such as Apartment instead of Flat) or more complete name (such as English language instead of English) that is unambiguous, commonly used in English (even without being the most common term), and equally clear, that term is typically the best to use. ... Natural disambiguation that is unambiguous, commonly used, and clear is generally preferable to parenthetical disambiguation."Didi Chuxing" is a commonly used, unambiguous, and more complete name for the company. Since natural disambiguation is preferable to parenthetical, we should use it instead of "Didi (company)". Λυδ α cιτγ 06:56, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
With regard to MOS:CAMELCASE I would suggest that this is one circumstance where the direction, "it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply," seems reasonable. Although DiDi may not be used by a preponderance of secondary sources, it's pretty clearly used on all Didi Chuxing branding for this arm of their business. In addition it allows for easier disambiguation within Wikipedia and lets us delete the annoying (company) tail. In short, even if it's not 100% in keeping with MOS guidelines, I think this is a circumstance where it's a good course of action. Simonm223 ( talk) 15:53, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Didi and Didi Chuxing are not used interchangeablyby User:Ita140188. Further, this source [16] is about Brazil receiving investment from
Chinese group Didi Chuxing, not "Didi". I've already refuted this with the primary source [17]
ABOUT DIDI CHUXING...DiDi is a ride-sharing platformused synonomously ...which has a link to [18]
Didi Chuxing, the Chinese ride-sharing giant that has big ambitions for international expansionCrunchbase
Didi Chuxing ...Also Known As Didi, [19] primary also has
Udacity, Didi Chuxing want to give you $100,000 ...The Verge
Didi Chuxing, the Chinese ride-hail behemoth, plans to expand to Mexico ...It would be the company’s first international expansion...Didi.. so no, by primary and secondary sources "Didi Chuxing" is used for international investments etc, not just China. Also, to recentre this discussion on the article, note it leads with Didi Chuxing Technology Co., (stylised DiDi) which is correct per above - this is about a Chinese company that has expansion plans., which is per Crunchbase, etc sources, none of which use "DiDi". (as comparison...despite the camel pushing here... Cheng Wei has it right
founder of Didi Chuxing ("DiDi", formerly known as Didi Kuaidi)) Widefox; talk 21:01, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization practices, even if the trademark owner considers nonstandard formatting "official", as long as this is a style already in widespread use, rather than inventing a new one:We should not invent "DiDi" when 99% of sources do not use it. Period. Further, per MOS:TMSTYLE the current stylised variant should not be used throughout the article (that can be fixed now). Widefox; talk 23:21, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Trademarks in "CamelCase" are a judgment call; the style may be used where it reflects general usage and makes the trademark more readable. ; OxyContin or Oxycontin – editor's choice; however: PlayStation only (camelcase preferred because Playstation is not widely-used.)Thirdly, once a title (like Didi) is not available, we're into disambiguation territory, where rules change. If Didi is not available, but DiDi is, and it's a NATURAL disambiguation, that's fair game for a title. Finally, and again, I saw consensus in the discussion favoring DiDi over DiDi (company). I did not see consensus favoring Didi Chuzing over DiDi (company). Discussion had petered, it was in the backlog, and it was time to make a decision. I did the best I could with what I was given. I could see no consensus for the specific proposed move, but I did see consensus for the move to DiDi. It was the best anyone could do, I think. -- В²C ☎ 01:00, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
where it reflects general usage. It is 1% of camelcase usage, and 99% normal usage of "Didi". Hmm, 99% or 1%. Which would I close? Widefox; talk 09:39, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Just a note, if only we devoted the time wasted in this useless discussion on actually editing articles, Wikipedia would be much better. -- Ita140188 ( talk) 02:50, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The contents of the Didi Dache page were merged into DiDi on 15 December 2017. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
The result of the move request was: move the page to DiDi (company), per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 00:47, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
Didi Chuxing →
DiDi (service) – Per
WP:COMMONNAME,
WP:TRANSLITERATE and
WP:TITLETM. Plus, the service is now using DiDi as its name for international markets. See its
official English website, which calls itself by just DiDi. Its app in the
App Store and
Play Store is also just DiDi for international markets. Didi Chuxing is undoubtedly a good name, but Chuxing is a hard to understand for English readers as it is Chinese pinyin. Welcome for discussion. Cheers.
Wefk423 (
talk) 17:42, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
The BBC and NYT have been using the name Didi Chuxing for two years [2] [3] so I added it to the altenative names. NYT has some use of just Didi but neither use the stylised DiDi, which the article is currently titled. It seems the WP:COMMONNAME may be Didi Chuxing (stylised DiDi). Widefox; talk 11:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
...English language reliable sources...) . The move discussion above isn't very enlightening or numerous. Widefox; talk 17:09, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Article titles should be recognizable to readers, unambiguous, and consistent with usage in reliable English-language sources(emphasis own) Ping others User:Timmyshin User:Ita140188 Widefox; talk 17:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
I appreciate your edit on adding it into the article lead. Cheers!). You also mentioned WSJ has used their full, official name "Didi Chuxing Technology Co.", but that does not mean it could qualify as a WP:COMMONNAME reason. As for the company profile, I believe it refers to the company in China, rather than the company that handles their international services. If you open their international website ( https://www.didiglobal.com), it will see that the official company name is Beijing Xiaoju Technology Co, Ltd. – Wefk423 ( talk) 17:46, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
While common names are generally preferred over official names as article titles(and the app, subsids, and other irrelevancies are not the company), and COMMONNAMES policy. See also Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies) . Widefox; talk 00:09, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to DiDi. There is no consensus to move back to the longer title Didi Chuxing. Claims that it meets NATURALDIS were offset by claims that this name refers only to the Chinese market, and worldwide the "Didi Chuxing" name is an official name rather than a common name. However, there is a consensus that straight DiDi is better than the current title, as it differs from other Didi entries in capitalisation, and also satisfies NATURALDIS. — Amakuru ( talk) 08:26, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
DiDi (company) →
Didi Chuxing – Revert bad move, flawed per above using the stylised (
WP:OFFICIALNAMES) camelcase version in the face of
WP:COMMONNAME, which is against policy/MOS as not dominant in sources (both all mentioned above, and all in article) per
MOS:CAMELCASE ..reflects general usage..
.
Widefox;
talk 17:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC) --Relisting.
Andrewa (
talk) 20:30, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
..reflects general usage and makes the trademark more readable..- it is not dominant in sources (see below) - for example only 2/100 article sources use camelcase (and one is a PR), and does not make more readable as per the examples there of compound nouns ie not like
OxyContin,
PlayStation
Whenever possible, common usagetherefore "Didi Chuxing" is preferred for disambiguation
Chinese group Didi Chuxing, didi-labs about
ABOUT DIDI CHUXING...DiDi is a ride-sharing platform, CNBC
Didi Chuxing, the Chinese ride-sharing giant that has big ambitions for international expansionCrunchbase
Didi Chuxing ...Also Known As Didi, [8] primary also has
Udacity, Didi Chuxing want to give you $100,000 ...The Verge
Didi Chuxing, the Chinese ride-hail behemoth, plans to expand to Mexico ...It would be the company’s first international expansion...Didi.. so no, by primary and secondary sources "Didi Chuxing" is used in international context, not just China. Widefox; talk 10:37, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
... and WSJ has full name "Didi Chuxing Technology Co.". Cheers. – Wefk423 ( talk) 18:51, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Uber Technologies Inc. (doing business as Uber), Amazon (company)
Amazon.com, Inc., doing business as Amazon(ie with trade name). The apps, and geographically named services are not to be conflated. This is English WP too. Widefox; talk 21:39, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
If you open their international website ( https://www.didiglobal.com), it will see that the official company name is Beijing Xiaoju Technology Co, Ltd. The company name you mentioned from WSJ is the one handling Chinese markets, we are not sure whether it is the parent company of all services. The situation is different than the companies you gave (Amazon and Uber), as DiDi has two different common names for different markets. – Wefk423 ( talk) 12:12, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Bad moves should be reverted. It is that simple.No, it's not. You kept emphasising that it was a bad move and it should be reverted to Didi Chuxing, but me and several editors have repeatedly pointed out that the name that appeared on the sources you listed here (Didi Chuxing) refers only to the service in Mainland China, and not the other numbers of market. Those sources used Didi in the title for a reason, it's been used as common name, not "
sometimes use "Didi" for short". Didi Chuxing is undoubtedly not a suitable name for a service that is available in different countries with a different name. For overseas countries that always used DiDi as common name to refer to the service, using Didi Chuxing is confusing to them. Is this an article only referring to the service in China, and not their hometown or country? – Wefk423 ( talk) 16:40, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
I suggest that if you don't know the name of the company, then you should refrain from moving the company to a different nameI'm here to once again make it clear to you. The move request was a proposal for discussion, and was moved per consensus. You make it seem like I have moved the article without making any discussion. Please refrain from persistently putting the blame of "bad move" to me. I'm asking nicely. – Wefk423 ( talk) 16:45, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
The company name you mentioned from WSJ is the one handling Chinese markets, we are not sure whether it is the parent company of all services.. Also, you mentioned
Didi Chuxing for short, or Didi for ambiguously short. No. Didi Chuxing is for China markets, DiDi is for all international markets. It has been mentioned by me and other editors many times. – Wefk423 ( talk) 16:40, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Natural disambiguation that is unambiguous, commonly used, and clear is generally preferable to parenthetical disambiguation. In this case, the natural disambiguation for this article is the company's official name, "Didi Chuxing", which is preferable to "Didi (company)". The company may have chosen to use the "DiDi" name in isolation for their international marketing, but "Didi Chuxing" remains the better title for this article. Λυδ α cιτγ 08:24, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
"didi" ride service -chuxing
gives 3 million results
[12], while "didi chuxing" ride service
gives only 378,000 results
[13] --
Ita140188 (
talk) 08:35, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Whenever possible, common usagetherefore "Didi Chuxing" is preferred for disambiguation) 3. even the bad move proponent (above) claims the lowercase is the commonname, invalidating the bad move rational. Widefox; talk 16:48, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
even the bad move proponent (above) claims the lowercase is the commonname, invalidating the bad move rational?? That does not mean that Didi Chuxing is suitable. It is not the common name and MOS:CAMELCASE also stated
Trademarks in "CamelCase" are a judgment call; the style may be used where it reflects general usage and makes the trademark more readable., this is why we have discussed the possiblity of moving to DiDi, the trademark name from DiDi. – Wefk423 ( talk) 16:57, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
general usagenot editors desire. Usage in RS is clear = not used. Period. Widefox; talk 17:18, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
the style may be used where it reflects general usagewhere "DiDi" camelcase is not used in any WP:RS above, so should not be used for the name or the article apart from the stylised mention in the lead. Widefox; talk 16:36, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
DiDi does not affect the CamelCase-ness of that title, as favored by Simonm223, then that move would not violate MOS:CAMELCASE, as you claim it would. -- В²C ☎ 23:40, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
If I were to close this now, I'd need to dscard much (perhaps most) of the above for various reasons... blatantly contrary to policy, personal opinion only, based on primary sources (see also the essay at wp:official names for more on that). Suggest the supporters in particular might try to clarify the reasons for their support.
And as part of this, is the stylised DiDi and the proposed natural disambiguation of Didi really the best possible proposal? Neither of these questions have been well addressed above.
That latest !vote, for example, appeals to WP:IDENTITY, presumably believing that it isn't clear which is most used (see the link they gave). That claim needs justification; Just name-dropping the MOS means nothing. In fact, none of their four arguments stand up to scrutiny, so I'd simply discard that !vote, and several others. Andrewa ( talk) 21:44, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
When there is another term (such as Apartment instead of Flat) or more complete name (such as English language instead of English) that is unambiguous, commonly used in English (even without being the most common term), and equally clear, that term is typically the best to use. ... Natural disambiguation that is unambiguous, commonly used, and clear is generally preferable to parenthetical disambiguation."Didi Chuxing" is a commonly used, unambiguous, and more complete name for the company. Since natural disambiguation is preferable to parenthetical, we should use it instead of "Didi (company)". Λυδ α cιτγ 06:56, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
With regard to MOS:CAMELCASE I would suggest that this is one circumstance where the direction, "it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply," seems reasonable. Although DiDi may not be used by a preponderance of secondary sources, it's pretty clearly used on all Didi Chuxing branding for this arm of their business. In addition it allows for easier disambiguation within Wikipedia and lets us delete the annoying (company) tail. In short, even if it's not 100% in keeping with MOS guidelines, I think this is a circumstance where it's a good course of action. Simonm223 ( talk) 15:53, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Didi and Didi Chuxing are not used interchangeablyby User:Ita140188. Further, this source [16] is about Brazil receiving investment from
Chinese group Didi Chuxing, not "Didi". I've already refuted this with the primary source [17]
ABOUT DIDI CHUXING...DiDi is a ride-sharing platformused synonomously ...which has a link to [18]
Didi Chuxing, the Chinese ride-sharing giant that has big ambitions for international expansionCrunchbase
Didi Chuxing ...Also Known As Didi, [19] primary also has
Udacity, Didi Chuxing want to give you $100,000 ...The Verge
Didi Chuxing, the Chinese ride-hail behemoth, plans to expand to Mexico ...It would be the company’s first international expansion...Didi.. so no, by primary and secondary sources "Didi Chuxing" is used for international investments etc, not just China. Also, to recentre this discussion on the article, note it leads with Didi Chuxing Technology Co., (stylised DiDi) which is correct per above - this is about a Chinese company that has expansion plans., which is per Crunchbase, etc sources, none of which use "DiDi". (as comparison...despite the camel pushing here... Cheng Wei has it right
founder of Didi Chuxing ("DiDi", formerly known as Didi Kuaidi)) Widefox; talk 21:01, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization practices, even if the trademark owner considers nonstandard formatting "official", as long as this is a style already in widespread use, rather than inventing a new one:We should not invent "DiDi" when 99% of sources do not use it. Period. Further, per MOS:TMSTYLE the current stylised variant should not be used throughout the article (that can be fixed now). Widefox; talk 23:21, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Trademarks in "CamelCase" are a judgment call; the style may be used where it reflects general usage and makes the trademark more readable. ; OxyContin or Oxycontin – editor's choice; however: PlayStation only (camelcase preferred because Playstation is not widely-used.)Thirdly, once a title (like Didi) is not available, we're into disambiguation territory, where rules change. If Didi is not available, but DiDi is, and it's a NATURAL disambiguation, that's fair game for a title. Finally, and again, I saw consensus in the discussion favoring DiDi over DiDi (company). I did not see consensus favoring Didi Chuzing over DiDi (company). Discussion had petered, it was in the backlog, and it was time to make a decision. I did the best I could with what I was given. I could see no consensus for the specific proposed move, but I did see consensus for the move to DiDi. It was the best anyone could do, I think. -- В²C ☎ 01:00, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
where it reflects general usage. It is 1% of camelcase usage, and 99% normal usage of "Didi". Hmm, 99% or 1%. Which would I close? Widefox; talk 09:39, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Just a note, if only we devoted the time wasted in this useless discussion on actually editing articles, Wikipedia would be much better. -- Ita140188 ( talk) 02:50, 14 September 2018 (UTC)