I say we use the rules as they are updated on 16-04-2016 after for instance Disney has changed it's name:

------
Studios
List the Studios in the following priority.

Theatrical Release Studio(s)
Production Company(s)

Media Companies
The company(ies) responsible for the publishing (creating, assembling and ordering of the DVD/HD/BD content) and/or physical distribution of the media.

Enter in the following order:

Publisher (Content) - Usually found as a logo on the bottom of the back cover or in the credit block, often containing the words "home video" or "home entertainment. Secondary publishers (eg. The Criterion Collection's Eclipse label) may also be listed.
Licensor (Home Video Rights) - Usually found (dated with the year of the DVD release) on the back of the box or in the credit block with words words regarding "under license from...".
Distributor - Usually found as a logo on the bottom of the back cover or in the credit block with words regarding distribution.
Some companies (using similar but different names) may serve more than one function. List such companies only once, using the name from the logo. List secondary publishers even if the name is similar. If you are unsure of the function performed, do not list the company.

Do not abbreviate Studio or Media Company names. e.g, use Universal Pictures not just Universal; The Criterion Collection rather than Criterion or Criterion Collection; Walt Disney Pictures not just Disney. Exception: If the studio name is too long to fit, use standard abbreviation rules.
-----

Ofcourse we can make our own rules but when they stated as they are i feel we need to comply or else it becomes chaos. Like everywhere else in this world!

BTW i am the one who changed Disney into Walt Disney Pictures because of the mentioning in the rules and other contributors who pointed this out.

Many have been approved and others still wait for approvement!

I think we should use the most 'complete' name for a studio.
So if a studio is listed twice, use the version that is the most 'complete', aka longest or non-abbreviated.

Quoting scotthm:

Quote:
Yes they do, and that is covered in The Rules:

Quote:
Some companies (using similar but different names) may serve more than one function. List such companies only once

In case of Disney it's not that easy I think.

Before 2007 Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures was named Buena Vista Pictures Distribution, Inc. Would you have deleted Disney (or any other name with Disney in it) if the movie was still released under the Buena Vista name?

And what about Marvel or Pixar, just like Disney part of The Walt Disney Studios. Should we delete those as well. From my point of view we shouldn't.

I totally agree.

As I read the rule, if it is the same company using different names for different functions, then list them only once.

So, I think a key question is:

Are they the same company, or are they different companies under one umbrella?

Quoting Darth Father:

Quote:
I say we use the rules as they are updated on 16-04-2016 after for instance Disney has changed it's name:

------
Studios
List the Studios in the following priority.

Theatrical Release Studio(s)
Production Company(s)

Media Companies
The company(ies) responsible for the publishing (creating, assembling and ordering of the DVD/HD/BD content) and/or physical distribution of the media.

Enter in the following order:

Publisher (Content) - Usually found as a logo on the bottom of the back cover or in the credit block, often containing the words "home video" or "home entertainment. Secondary publishers (eg. The Criterion Collection's Eclipse label) may also be listed.
Licensor (Home Video Rights) - Usually found (dated with the year of the DVD release) on the back of the box or in the credit block with words words regarding "under license from...".
Distributor - Usually found as a logo on the bottom of the back cover or in the credit block with words regarding distribution.
Some companies (using similar but different names) may serve more than one function. List such companies only once, using the name from the logo. List secondary publishers even if the name is similar. If you are unsure of the function performed, do not list the company.

Do not abbreviate Studio or Media Company names. e.g, use Universal Pictures not just Universal; The Criterion Collection rather than Criterion or Criterion Collection; Walt Disney Pictures not just Disney. Exception: If the studio name is too long to fit, use standard abbreviation rules.
-----

Ofcourse we can make our own rules but when they stated as they are i feel we need to comply or else it becomes chaos. Like everywhere else in this world!

BTW i am the one who changed Disney into Walt Disney Pictures because of the mentioning in the rules and other contributors who pointed this out.

Many have been approved and others still wait for approvement!

You're making a mess and others will have to clean up after this ignorance. Ignorance because of not bothering to check, adjust and correct that "Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures" is the only production studio that should be credited, IF the change would be valid and warranted to begin with. You seem only honed in on "the fact" that some old rule says "we can't abbreviate".
As I see it, that rule seems to be generally deemed incorrect, at least for several cases, including this one. I think the main thing is that there's confusion to what an abbreviation really is and also how studios should be credited. So we get yes-votes from people who don't know what's right.
Yet still, it's so unfortunate that the quoted rule uses "Disney" as an example. To the point of being dumb. I honestly wonder if Ken knew what he was doing writing that. It's the culprit, regardless. If he was sane when he wrote it, he ACTUALLY meant "don't be lazy and abbreviate. Write the full studio name as credited". But here we are, interpreting the rules like... you know.

Quoting Darth Father:

Quote:
Quoting MikaLove:

Quote:

You're making a mess and others will have to clean up after this ignorance..

Of course you can insult me but i just wanted to follow the rules as stated and as some contributors pointed out to me when i added just "Disney". It's always so easy to point to another when you believe your right yourself and ignore the given rules completely. I didn't point out anyone but was just following the specific Contribution Rules which i hadn't seen earlier untill someone made me notice them.
I personally think it's wrong to ignore those rules however they came to be but it's also wrong to make me the bad guy by just following them! Even more crazy that the screeners from Invelos don't know their own rules and approve and decline them just by being blind.

That's it for me now back to enjoy the good things DVD Profiler offers me  Goodnight

It's rather easy, though. You can't just read the rules, you need to understand them, see the reason behind them and be able to make nuances. At the very least, understand that since you do get criticism, you should take a moment to think if your contributions were really correct.
And the screeners don't always make the right decisions either. Which is both confusing and annoying. Plus, they are invisible.
But us here are not. "Disney" is not in the cases we've talked about here an abbreviation.
If you don't know what or how to contribute, then don't do it and if you do, you should learn from any mistakes. That's what we all have had to face. Myself included.

I also agree with MikaLove.