This looks like it should be listed as a translation under PLC and also listed in "Types of companies" page off the front page. Translations really aren't supposed to be under foriegn language entries (but I can see why they did it here under the abbreviation - it is a bit confusing.) --Connel MacKenzie 02:19, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- They're not quite translations, each country has different rules... they're analogous terms. But PLC itself isn't the "English" term, it's the England term. 126.96.36.199 08:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for cleanup.
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
The rfc asks "translations or related?" for the "See also" list in the entry of selected abbreviations of legal entity names for various countries. It seems to me that we should have an appendix for these that each individual entry could refer to in its "See also" section. I would also think we should have Latin/Roman spellings, whatever the original script, whatever the result of the more general decision about romanizations and transliterations. There are likely to be standard romanizations that are broadly agreed/accepted in international commerce. DCDuring TALK 16:27, 2 October 2008 (UTC)