Talk:Todd Corporation

New Zealand Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Energy Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge?

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.

The result was merge into Todd Corporation. -- DarkCrow^Caw 17:24, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User Beagel has proposed that Todd Energy be merged with Todd Corporation, but there don't seem to be any points made to support this proposal. Is it Wikipedia policy that all subsidiaries be merged with their parent article? If so, articles like Bay of Plenty Electricity and King Country Energy should be merged in as well. The energy business of Todd Energy is quite different to the businesses of Todd Capital and Todd Motors. Merging all these different companies together would make a large diverse article, not easy to read. --Pakaraki (talk) 09:22, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, there is no such policy. If you just could make more clear the notability of Todd Energy, and interlinkage and difference between Todd Energy and Todd Corporation (in both articles), they could stay as separate articles. Beagel (talk) 06:42, 26 July 2009 (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.

Requested move 9 November 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Technical request to revert a not-discussed move. Wbm1058 (talk) 18:58, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Todd Corporation → Todd Corporation – Why was this moved out of the article namespace without prior discussion? The article has been around for several years and the sudden change of namespace looks incorrect. Stefan2 (talk) 15:41, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto. Why is this article deleted without discussion? The subject is notable and relevant to many topic areas. Pakaraki (talk) 17:51, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Todd Corporation. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20150703002929/http://www.kce.co.nz:80/get-to-know-us/ to http://www.kce.co.nz/get-to-know-us/

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:38, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That archive link looks ok. --Pakaraki (talk) 04:12, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]