Forget "VARIATIONS". The data is what it is and very definitely varies over time with the majority of companies. We don't use Common Denominators, that is a LOCAL only decision. WHO is going to decide what the Common Denominator is? Don't look at me. this little black duck isn't goingb there, nor would I trust any other user to determine what the Common Denominator is. I tried to put some minor controls on this, to try and spare Ken from being pummeled with demands for another Alias system, especially when we have one that is such a mess right now, For that I attempt I have been poummeled mercilessly, so NO THANKS. The data is what it is, any other decision is YOURS locally. PERIOD.

Skip

Dee1959jay is right: we already DO use more or less "standardized" (or "correct") names for film studios, as evidenced by the Studios Reference Thread. Also, the rules have recently been updated to instruct us to drop any locality-specific suffixes from studio names, in another bid to eliminate pointless double entries for the same companies. All in all, I can find little support for keeping separate entries for "RCV Entertainment" and "RCV Sell Thru Entertainment"... For the record, here's a link to their website:

Quote:
RCV Film Distribution-RCV Rental-RCV Sell Thru-RCV Support-RCV 2001. Are all divisions of RCV Entertainment B.V.

Additionally, the logo on all their DVD's is simply "RCV", both on the cover and on the DVD's itself. Again: I don't see any good reason to keep these separated.

I have not checked the disc, only the cover.
I'll do a wee little test to see what appears on the startup logo (usually just RCV with an elipse around it)

edit: Yep, just RCV with an elipse.

.

can you maybe post the EAN so that interestant other ones can check the cover? thx

Quoting RaymondG:

Quote:
I was wondering about something -->

Publishers seem to use some varieties for their firmnames. For example:

RCV Entertainment (by far the most have that named as publisher / distributor)
RCV Sell Thru Entertainment (Some of the DVD's have this on the backcover)

Personally, I think we should use the common denominator for these instances and use RCV entertainment for all RCV products.
If we don't the field wil become kind of useless for statistic and filtering purposes; if you forget one variation in your filter / statistic the results will be awkward to say the least.
As long as we don't have a reference table to link all these variations to it's origin (in this case RCV) it will all become a blurry mess of publishers.

Any thoughts on this?

Locally I prefer just one name for a publisher. But in the database we just use the info taken from the release itself. The rules clearly state:
"Enter the DVD publishing company which is usually found (dated with the year of the DVD release) on the back of the box. If the DVD Publishing company isn't located on the box or packaging, take the DVD publisher from the disc's credits." http://www.invelos.com/dvdpro/contributions/Rules.aspx?display=filmdetails

First of all the disc credits should only be used when there's no credit on the back cover at all.

Secondly, the publisher's name should be taken from the copyright notice: "usually found (dated with the year of the DVD release) on the back of the box."

In all the RCV DVD releases I own this company is credited on the cover as RCV Entertainment or as RCV Sell Thru Entertainment (with in front of the credit Distributie: ).

Maybe we should make a poll out of this?

It will NOT change anything here, I don't deal in outside data, except as the Rules allow for some Roles. I ONLY deal in data obtained from each individual title, each stands entirely on its own and is not connected in that regard to any other title. This is simply another version of creating imaginary data for some users convenience, such data belongs ONLY in the users local database and NOT inb  the Online. If Ken wants to create another Alias system, that is up to him, but we should ONLY deal in real-life data from each title individually. Outside sources mean NOTHING, in this particular case, Giga since you brought it up do you have any idea WHY RCV would use so many variations or what meaning might be contained therein...I certainly don't. Same is true of othjer companies, I mentioned earlier this data AS CREDITED is important data as it tracks the evolving marketplace, for example UHV(to 1999), UHE(2000-2004), USHV(2004, noted on UPC label), USHE(2004-present).

Skip

I agree with Unicus.