Talk:Eidos Interactive

message: :Image:SCI-Logo2.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 10:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:SCI-Logo2.jpg

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 05:15, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Eidos logo.svg Nominated for Deletion

message: The logo is not correct. Here's the correct one:  --MK (talk) 16:10, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The image you have here is either from  or , neither of which is a reliable source. The logo we have currently is included in reliable sources, among those Engadget (likely formerly a Joystiq article). Why should your version of the logo be included? Lordtobi (✉) 15:11, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: My comment is actually over 5 years old, I just corrected the link recently. But I do not think the logo used in the article is an official one (may be fan-made or proposed only). The one I am referring to can be found on official sites such as the official Facebook page  and in their UK offices  . But anyway, even this one is probably no longer being used for the European branch. --MK (talk) 08:49, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Logo 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:SCi Games which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 16:04, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: Beautiful Game Studios does not have to appear in annual reports because it is merely a division, not an incorporated subsidiary. Furthermore, it only ever appeared in the 2009 report, similar to Square Enix London Studios, which was never mentioned in any annual report. Yet, BGS was active until at least July 2011, so a lack of presence in annual reports is not a good indicator for the studio to have dissolved. We should seek to handle SELS and BGS in the same way, meaning that we should seek for a source that outlines that has actually shut down, in opposition to those that confirms that BGS remains operational. Lordtobi (✉) 22:04, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beautiful Game Studios 

message: The company "Square Enix Europe" may not be sold in its entirety, but this very article was formerly Eidos Interactive. I suggest there to be a separation of two, with this one getting renamed to "Eidos Interactive Entertainment" or whatever name they choose after the acquisition closes. --Merko (talk) 15:02, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This entity here will remain the same as far as we know, so no split appears appropriate at the moment. If they even choose to create a new head company for the three studios, we can create a new article for that should it become notable. IceWelder [✉] 15:04, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree with IceWelder, as this article was created to encompass Eidos Interactive. Merko is indeed correct that the article should be moved back to Eidos, with "Square Enix Europe" likely redirecting to the requisite section, or having a new page at this location.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:32, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  But this entity, Square Enix Limited/Eidos Interactive Limited, isn't being sold. The sale encompasses only Eidos Interactive Corp. (the Canadaian holdkng for Square Enix Montréal and Eidos-Montréal) and Crystal Dynamics, alonside some IPs. That's not all IPs (Just Cause, Life Is Strange are among those announced to have not been sold) and Square Enix Collective will also remain part of this business. The company is not the same Eidos Interactive it was in 2009, and moving it just because some of the IPs it was formerly known for are being sold does not make sense. IceWelder [✉] 20:20, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acquisition of Eidos-Montréal, Crystal Dynamics and SE Montréal alongside intellectual properties by Embracer Group 

message: :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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: No consensus. Move the discussion below and work it out.   UtherSRG (talk) 19:18, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Square Enix Europe →  – Talk:Square Enix Europe#Renaming article. IceWelder [✉] 16:24, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

text: This is a contested technical request (permalink). Steel1943 (talk) 18:24, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:   I'm not objecting, but given there has been prior discussion this should go to a WP:RM discussion as per WP:PCM and not just a technical request. -Kj cheetham (talk) 16:35, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

text:  Pinging participants. Steel1943 (talk) 18:24, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 14 September 2022 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I think there is rough consensus that Square Enix Europe no longer satisfies the title criteria for the contents of the page. I had opposed a move to Eidos Interactive because the company in its essence is not defunct and continuing as the twelfth operative group of Embracer under the name of CDE Entertainment, and Eidos Interactive name can be confused with Eidos Interactive Corporation (legal name of Eidos-Montréal).
Proposal: split Square Enix Europe into two articles. Rough drafts: Draft: CDE Entertainment and Draft: Square Enix Limited.
 There might be a need for cleanup to reduce overlap. Merko (talk) 09:39, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Split proposal

message: So I don't have time to provide a GA review, but based on what I've seen personally. A couple of things need work. For one, I noticed there's the constant verbiage "Take over". The more technical and still widely accepted term is Acquisition. I recommend replacing that word with that.
The studio list would probably be best suited as a table.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 17:37, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This is my first GAN, thanks in advance for bearing with me. I have considered takeover, see Cambridge Dictionary. It is the technically term for a publicly listed firm in British English, but maybe too confusing for WP. (I had changed it to "acquired", but then restored it). Regarding the studio list; I agree it needs formatting work. IgelRM (talk) 21:58, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Some things to consider before GA review