This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pirate Politics, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Pirate PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject Pirate PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Pirate PoliticsPirate Politics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
MPAA Kyle (talk·contribs) This user has not edited the article. This user has declared a connection.
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I'm guessing that it's probably too soon for another requested move, but I see "Motion Picture Association" rapidly becoming the WP:COMMONNAME, especially among those news organizations that are particularly involved in the entertainment industry. I'm just going to document a few here for the next time this comes up:
Clark, Dan (December 11, 2019). "US Copyright Chief to Lead Motion Picture Association Legal Team". Corporate Counsel. Retrieved December 12, 2019. Karyn Temple will begin her new role at the Motion Picture Association on Jan. 13 and be based at the organization's Washington, D.C., headquarters.
(multiple instances, actually, but this one is typical:) Johnson, Ted (November 22, 2019). "Justice Department Files Motion To Terminate Paramount Consent Decrees". Deadline. Retrieved December 12, 2019. The DOJ received 82 comments as part of its review, but the studios did not chime in, either through the Motion Picture Association or on their own.
(again, multiple instances, a typical one:) Vas, Nicole (December 10, 2019). "Lobbying world". The Hill. Retrieved December 12, 2019. Karyn A. Temple was named senior executive vice president and global general counsel at the Motion Picture Association.
Bryant, Tim (December 11, 2019). "UGA to offer Masters in Film". WGAU Radio. Retrieved December 12, 2019. There are nearly 45,800 direct motion picture and television industry jobs in Georgia, according to the Motion Picture Association.
Ellingson, Annlee (November 18, 2019). "Box-office champ 'Ford v Ferrari' injected $100M+ into California economy". Los Angeles Business Journal. Retrieved December 12, 2019. "To recreate Ford's renowned Michigan headquarters, Ferrari's legendary Italian headquarters and the iconic Les Mans track in France, all in the heart of Southern California, is no easy feat," said Motion Picture Association Chairman Charles Rivkin in a statement.
(One site that's not, strictly speaking, news: the United States Copyright Office:) "Register Karyn A. Temple Announces Departure from the Copyright Office". Copyright Office NewsNet. No. 791. U.S. Copyright Office. December 9, 2019. Retrieved December 9, 2019. Today, Register of Copyrights Karyn Temple announced that she will be leaving the Copyright Office on January 3, 2020, to accept a new position with the Motion Picture Association.
The cites above are a little heavy on the Karyn Temple resignation story, but that's mostly a matter of the timing of the search; that's the most recent significant news involving the MPA. TJRC (talk) 23:24, 12 December 2019 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 4 years ago10 comments7 people in discussion
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.
Support Sources still seem about split in whether they use the old or current title. But given that it is not in question that the current title is the accurate one, it feels like we should air on the side of using the correct one. I always find it weird when an article is titled ZZZ but the first sentence accurately begins with "YYY is." It also would help clear up some confusion -- apparently the MPAA's offices in other countries were always referred to as MPA, and so now there is MPA as the whole organization and the organization in the US, and then "MPA Canada," "MPA Latin America" etc for its offices in other countries.--Yaksar(let's chat)15:56, 6 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
Strong support per nom requested as long as this name remains a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. If someone/other countries create similar name as MPA and claims as equal primary topic. a disambiguation page would need to create. 114.125.13.52 (talk) 16:11, 6 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
Oppose I reviewed American newspapers from 2020, and found that it is still more common to include "of America". I suspect this is done by them to intentionally disambiguate from MPA international organizations, and that is a practice that I think we have to continue doing here based on that preponderance of use. (If you'd like to confirm, here is how I searched: Start at the Wikipedia Library, access ProQuest, search "Motion Picture Association", filter by Newspapers / last 12 months / location> U.S /, and sort by recent.) While I think there has been some movement since the last RM on Oct 2019, keep in mind that we're still less than a year out from the change from a name which was in use for ~75 years - there's going to be some attachment in sources to the old name. Let's give this another year and see where it stands. -- Netoholic@19:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
I think the stats and evidence you point to are all accurate. And I'm usually pretty consistent about feeling that a subject's common name should be the page name. But in cases like this, where we know a name change has occurred and that one name is now accurate (MPA) and one is not (MPAA), as long as it is clear the new name is getting use in reliable sources it usually makes sense to go with the accurate one. There are definitely exceptions, like when it may be controversial or when it is clear that it is temporary (if the Texas State Fair said it would now be called the American Airlines Texas State Fair), but this does not seem like one of those cases.--Yaksar(let's chat)21:08, 6 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
I think the main reason reflects why sources still use "of America" - to make clear this is talking about MPA's operations in the U.S. and to avoid needing something like Motion Picture Association (U.S.). Some sources (especially outside the U.S.) do use the new shorter name, but have to workaround the ambiguity by stating it like "a report by the U.S. Motion Picture Association". I'd prefer to keep the old name than potentially have to need some other type of disambiguation. -- Netoholic@02:41, 7 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
Likely plays a role, but it's not like the other offices are autonomous subjects -- they are really just the branches of the main MPA on other continents. And then the main one seems analogous as the US one -- there doesn't seem to be a separate official US branch that isn't the main organization.--Yaksar(let's chat)16:13, 7 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Should Netflix be recognized as the 'Sixth Major Studio' that happens to be operating outside the traditional Hollywood Studio System? It's almost exclusively streaming, yes, but it's become a major production company that's significantly changed the way the film and television industries operate and distribute their content; both in America and abroad. Disney+ and HBOMax are arguably two of the biggest by-products of Hollywood's significant emphasis on streaming in the business.Internet Informant (talk) 11:15, 26 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
You make a sound point but until reliable sources start describing Netflix as such then we can't really refer to it as a "major" studio on Wikipedia. Part of the problem is that the term is anachronistic and refers to a time when production studios owned vast sound stages. It's not a good fit with the modern era of film-making but the term has stuck. Betty Logan (talk) 22:12, 26 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
Concur. The point of WP:NOT and WP:NOR is that WP always follows and it never leads. It's up to the journalists at the trade papers like THR and Variety to decide whether Netflix should be considered a major film studio. --Coolcaesar (talk) 22:55, 26 June 2021 (UTC)Reply