Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
And to quote the Rules:

Quote:
There is further information about correct names for studios, and the opportunity to ask questions if unsure, in the Contributions forum.

If we were to enter "as credited", what was the need for such a Rule or such a thread?

I never liked the thread, so don't know what the need was, as to the rule, IMHO, it is to prevent the entry of some studios that are credited in 'shorthand'...Seraphim Films, rather than just 'Seraphim'...and to allow us to enter the proper name, when they are only credited in logo form...'Universal Pictures' rather than just 'Universal'.

I don't think, though only Ken has the answer, it was ever intended for us to standardize all studio names based on the current studio name.

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
since the rules do NOT say to enter studios "as credited", but instead tell us to use "correct names" for studios.

No, the rules say that "There is further information about correct names for studios, and the opportunity to ask questions if unsure, in the Contributions forum."  It does not tell us to use "correct names", nor does it imply that the primary information should not come from the discs themselves.  In fact, the Rules state that "The authoritative source for information submitted should be the DVD itself."

---------------

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
...and to allow us to enter the proper name, when they are only credited in logo form...'Universal Pictures' rather than just 'Universal'...

For converting logos, where no text appears on the case or the credits, it could be useful.  Beyond that, the entry should be strictly "as credited".

I could live with that.