This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Syncopy Inc. article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
On 22 March 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to Syncopy. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
We are all told that Syncopy exists, i.e. we can see its logo on films it produces. However, the company has no public or official website, physical address, financial information, public records, or general information associated with it. Is this a fictional or unregistered company? If so, there should be a mention of it in the article. Also, I personally would like to know who the players are besides just the founders, i.e. I am sure that this is not a two-person organization.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.162.21 ( talk • contribs) 17:27, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Prove it, provide references! Otherwise stop deleting the obvious truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.162.21 ( talk) 14:40, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Once again you are wrong and have provided faulty information, the company you cite is not Syncopy Films it is Syncopy Inc. which state it has a $150,000 a year revenue stream, hardly the revenue stream of a company that produces billion dollar movies. Also, take the time to learn that "Syncopy" is also a medical ailment that has companies structured to prevent it, and the example you provided is from the industry of: Commercial Printing. Try: http://companies.findthecompany.com/l/27392557/Syncopy-Inc-in-Beverly-Hills-CA
Once again you have failed to prove your premise, so the only way Schodinger's Cat is going to disappear is for you to post tangible and verifiable facts. Epic Fail on credibility with your previous evidence. If I show you a photo of Osama Bin Laden would that prove that he currently existed?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.162.21 ( talk) 22:03, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
So I guess they are in the business of commercial printing? The link I provided says nothing about Christopher Nolan and I am beginning to think you are a troll. http://companies.findthecompany.com/l/27392557/Syncopy-Inc-in-Beverly-Hills-CA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.162.21 ( talk) 22:33, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
You can't vandalize the truth, you are providing fraudulent information to back your claims, it is obvious that Syncopy Films isn't making only $150,000 a year (left frame) nor is it in the "Commercial Printing (except Screen and Books)" industry (center margin) Fraud, fraud, fraud! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.162.21 ( talk) 23:29, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Another question is: if Syncopy Films is a real company, then how could it be as the article states an "American-British" company? It would either be registered in America or Britain, it cannot be a transnational company? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.162.21 ( talk) 23:33, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Ok, this has gone on too long.
There is no citations for Syncopy being called "Plump" either; maybe this whole article is a logical fallacy?
ZNTRIP consistently supplies fraudulent information and links to support his claims, then reports me for vandalism because he doesn't like being called on it, and now you are threatening to block me because this troll wants his fraudulent information to remain? Is this Wikipedia or Wiki-lies. This online trolling and bullying has to stop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.162.21 ( talk) 23:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Should it not read: "syncope" from the Greek, meaning feinting........? 123.211.230.125 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:20, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Edit warring and lack of civility aside, is this company considered notable per the guidelines at WP:CORP? I performed a search engine test of this topic and found only passing mentions. Erik ( talk | contribs) 00:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
"1/4 American" shows your lack of understanding that a corporation's national base is according to the country in which it is founded. It's not their children; it's a legal document. It is governed by American laws, not British laws because Nolan/Thomas are British. The real issue is that I made a legitimate edit with legitimate references and you removed it for no legimate reason. If you have no legit reason to remove it, leave it be. Bobbyandbeans ( talk) 16:59, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
==Both Nolan and Emma Thomas are British, and they made the company and they run it, the headquarters are in London. How is it an American company? And by the way Christopher Nolan is not half American half British, his father is British and his mother is American but he was born in England. He is mostly English
It's not a key part. Saying it is an American company is misleading, it may be registered in the US, but it is run by Brits. Don't forget it's offices are supposedly in LA - where Hollywood is, which makes senses considering that is where Movies are generally made. That "legal" document says on page 2 line 21 "qualified to do business in California" which would imply that if it isn't registered then it cannot do business! In the absence of a clear Wikipedia policy to fall back on in what to do in these scenario's then it should just be left out. Pointing out it is registered in the US, but run by Brits was perfectly acceptable compromise/middle ground. For the record, I was being bold and in light of WP:BRD Beans you should of started this before reverting a revert, especially when I had already justified the change and saying a line is bad writing is not appropriate, especially when it is a perfectly accepted connective clause in the sentence. MisterShiney ✉ 17:10, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
When Wikipedia first came out it was touted as the site "anyone could edit" now its evolved into what amounts to cyber-bullying by anyone with a computer and time to kill. In the years since Wikipedia began I have attempted several dozen times only to get outmaneuvered and by what can only be described as Wiki real estate agents who see the website as their home. They show no regard or respect for the common user or the expert in a field that is being commented on. In fact, they believe since they register their name and create a profile a'la Facebook that this somehow makes them an authority and a policeman on ever page they visit. I live in the real world and after watching these last few entries I will say that I will never post nor use Wikipedia ever again after this entry. You have won and you have lost, because fraud and lies have consequences in the real world and I know that one day you will step outside of the Wiki world into the real world and your antics will spell disaster for your lives. You had the chance to speak and edit in an honest manner and you instead chose once again to bully, lie and cheat into getting your way. It is a sociopathic personality that acts like this and I am more than sure that your problems go well beyond one pissed off common user who could have been an addition to the Wiki community rather than a causality. Goodbye and may the odds be never in your favor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.168.101 ( talk) 21:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Not 'Syncopy Films'. The legal document listed as a source in the opening paragraph name the company as 'Syncopy, Inc.', this info about Nolan from The Dark Knight Rises website also name the company simply as 'Syncopy'. These Inception production notes do the same. -- Allthestrongbowintheworld ( talk) 01:20, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
All companies must have a physical address, seeing that none exists for Syncopy, it is obvious that this company doesn't exist except as a legal representation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 16:15, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
There seems to be an agenda of deception not inception among the editors of this article. Produce the physical location of the business or simply shut up. Every company that legally exists has to do this, do why doesn't Syncopy? Maybe they should rename it Area 51? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
98.67.161.98 (
talk) 18:59, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Shoddy reporting. Can't back up your argument with facts, then you fail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 18:18, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Epic Fail. System Failure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 00:36, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Disruption is providing false information over and over. Its funny, you guys keep go back and forth whether the company is British or American, if you cannot even figure that out you should just back off completely. Your computer has encountered a fatal error of conscience and must shut down so that lies will not contaminate other users. I don't like bullies in the real world and I don't like them on a "community" like Wikipedia.
"Delusions" -- wouldn't that constitute an attack on another user? Funny how those attack warnings only seem to work one way?
1. "Syncopy" is cited as a Great Britain production company in IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/company/co0147954/
2. Also, Syncopy now has a Tmblr account and lists the official name as "Syncopy Films" with no "Inc." http://syncopyfilms.tumblr.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 19:51, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
3. "Syncopy Films" has a Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Syncopy-Films/109375539080542 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 19:54, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
The reliability of IMDb for production company information is questionable, per
Wikipedia:Citing IMDb. Syncopy Films' Facebook page is merely a reposting of this Wikipedia article.
Primogen (
talk) 18:13, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Okay,so user 98.67.161.98 clearly seems uninterested in bringing forward a discussion or even an explaination about his recent edits, so it appears I shall have to do so. Firstly, the nationality of the company appears to be in dispute, and with no sources supporting either argument that it is British or American, it should IMO be left out. Secondly, to list the company website as an IMDb profile is frankly laughable and should be removed for obvious reasons. -- Allthestrongbowintheworld ( talk) 21:13, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Look above! It seems you are seriously misinformed and creating doubt where there is none. This entire entry shows how bad Wikipedia has become for real reporting and accurate information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 21:16, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
You seem to have a real chip on your shoulder based on this snide entry and all of your other historical edits. I think you just want to be right, and not provide correct information to the users of this website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 21:41, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Again, you should slow down and take more time. Nowhere in the main article did I cite a Facebook page. Please demonstrate to me how a British GB company is incorporated as a California company, and how dubious documents that list no public information make it into the public records? For 3 months so many of you have wasted your time and time of others playing tug-of-war over dubious and most likely false information. Looking at all of the back and forth history over and over the same information here indicates just plain mischief and nothing that serves this website as a place of factual information. Quote rules all you want, it still doesn't get anyone closer to what real and not real here and the immaturity demonstrated by all on this page is just mind-boggling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 22:07, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Your replies seem more like rants than anything educational or constructive; you should really take a deep breath and think before writing.
Yawn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 13:35, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
You wouldn't know genuine or logical if it was presented to you on a plate. I have never seen such obvious misuse of resources and dialogue until I found these Wikipedia users. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 01:31, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Pack of wolves who only wish to tear apart every common user on Wikipedia. Look at this horrible page and think about your own behaviors. You play by rules you don't even keep yourself and you bully or group bully anyone you disagree with. I think if someone at Wikipedia looked at your behavior as shown on this page any reasonable person would come to the same conclusion. You do not own Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.110.153 ( talk) 12:46, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Can i request that a table be made with the syncopy movies critical reception on metacritic, Roten tomatoes and BFCA??? Poroboros ( talk) 19:19, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
«The next film to be released will be Dunkirk (2017)» -- Tuxayo ( talk) 14:31, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Concerning the company's offical name and headquarters (as discussed above), I've done thorough research and added several new credible sources to the article, including an offical document. Also reworked the lede with additonal information about the name. Best regards, 185.176.244.83 ( talk) 12:18, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
SYNCOPY SY•OP•YNC — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blaczac117 ( talk • contribs) 01:49, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) asilvering ( talk) 22:52, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Syncopy Inc. → Syncopy – For some reason, Syncopy redirects to Syncope (medicine). The former spelling is not mentioned anywhere on the article, and I could find no evidence online that syncopy is anything but a misspelling of syncope. Possibly, the redirect was created as the phonetic spelling of the medical term, since Syncopy Inc. was not created until two years later. As no other article titled "syncopy" currently exists, and syncopy appears to be an uncommon misspelling of syncope, the production company should not need to be disambiguated. InfiniteNexus ( talk) 06:51, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Syncopy Inc. article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
On 22 March 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to Syncopy. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
We are all told that Syncopy exists, i.e. we can see its logo on films it produces. However, the company has no public or official website, physical address, financial information, public records, or general information associated with it. Is this a fictional or unregistered company? If so, there should be a mention of it in the article. Also, I personally would like to know who the players are besides just the founders, i.e. I am sure that this is not a two-person organization.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.162.21 ( talk • contribs) 17:27, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Prove it, provide references! Otherwise stop deleting the obvious truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.162.21 ( talk) 14:40, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Once again you are wrong and have provided faulty information, the company you cite is not Syncopy Films it is Syncopy Inc. which state it has a $150,000 a year revenue stream, hardly the revenue stream of a company that produces billion dollar movies. Also, take the time to learn that "Syncopy" is also a medical ailment that has companies structured to prevent it, and the example you provided is from the industry of: Commercial Printing. Try: http://companies.findthecompany.com/l/27392557/Syncopy-Inc-in-Beverly-Hills-CA
Once again you have failed to prove your premise, so the only way Schodinger's Cat is going to disappear is for you to post tangible and verifiable facts. Epic Fail on credibility with your previous evidence. If I show you a photo of Osama Bin Laden would that prove that he currently existed?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.162.21 ( talk) 22:03, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
So I guess they are in the business of commercial printing? The link I provided says nothing about Christopher Nolan and I am beginning to think you are a troll. http://companies.findthecompany.com/l/27392557/Syncopy-Inc-in-Beverly-Hills-CA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.162.21 ( talk) 22:33, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
You can't vandalize the truth, you are providing fraudulent information to back your claims, it is obvious that Syncopy Films isn't making only $150,000 a year (left frame) nor is it in the "Commercial Printing (except Screen and Books)" industry (center margin) Fraud, fraud, fraud! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.162.21 ( talk) 23:29, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Another question is: if Syncopy Films is a real company, then how could it be as the article states an "American-British" company? It would either be registered in America or Britain, it cannot be a transnational company? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.162.21 ( talk) 23:33, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Ok, this has gone on too long.
There is no citations for Syncopy being called "Plump" either; maybe this whole article is a logical fallacy?
ZNTRIP consistently supplies fraudulent information and links to support his claims, then reports me for vandalism because he doesn't like being called on it, and now you are threatening to block me because this troll wants his fraudulent information to remain? Is this Wikipedia or Wiki-lies. This online trolling and bullying has to stop. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.162.21 ( talk) 23:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Should it not read: "syncope" from the Greek, meaning feinting........? 123.211.230.125 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 12:20, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Edit warring and lack of civility aside, is this company considered notable per the guidelines at WP:CORP? I performed a search engine test of this topic and found only passing mentions. Erik ( talk | contribs) 00:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
"1/4 American" shows your lack of understanding that a corporation's national base is according to the country in which it is founded. It's not their children; it's a legal document. It is governed by American laws, not British laws because Nolan/Thomas are British. The real issue is that I made a legitimate edit with legitimate references and you removed it for no legimate reason. If you have no legit reason to remove it, leave it be. Bobbyandbeans ( talk) 16:59, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
==Both Nolan and Emma Thomas are British, and they made the company and they run it, the headquarters are in London. How is it an American company? And by the way Christopher Nolan is not half American half British, his father is British and his mother is American but he was born in England. He is mostly English
It's not a key part. Saying it is an American company is misleading, it may be registered in the US, but it is run by Brits. Don't forget it's offices are supposedly in LA - where Hollywood is, which makes senses considering that is where Movies are generally made. That "legal" document says on page 2 line 21 "qualified to do business in California" which would imply that if it isn't registered then it cannot do business! In the absence of a clear Wikipedia policy to fall back on in what to do in these scenario's then it should just be left out. Pointing out it is registered in the US, but run by Brits was perfectly acceptable compromise/middle ground. For the record, I was being bold and in light of WP:BRD Beans you should of started this before reverting a revert, especially when I had already justified the change and saying a line is bad writing is not appropriate, especially when it is a perfectly accepted connective clause in the sentence. MisterShiney ✉ 17:10, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
When Wikipedia first came out it was touted as the site "anyone could edit" now its evolved into what amounts to cyber-bullying by anyone with a computer and time to kill. In the years since Wikipedia began I have attempted several dozen times only to get outmaneuvered and by what can only be described as Wiki real estate agents who see the website as their home. They show no regard or respect for the common user or the expert in a field that is being commented on. In fact, they believe since they register their name and create a profile a'la Facebook that this somehow makes them an authority and a policeman on ever page they visit. I live in the real world and after watching these last few entries I will say that I will never post nor use Wikipedia ever again after this entry. You have won and you have lost, because fraud and lies have consequences in the real world and I know that one day you will step outside of the Wiki world into the real world and your antics will spell disaster for your lives. You had the chance to speak and edit in an honest manner and you instead chose once again to bully, lie and cheat into getting your way. It is a sociopathic personality that acts like this and I am more than sure that your problems go well beyond one pissed off common user who could have been an addition to the Wiki community rather than a causality. Goodbye and may the odds be never in your favor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.168.101 ( talk) 21:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
Not 'Syncopy Films'. The legal document listed as a source in the opening paragraph name the company as 'Syncopy, Inc.', this info about Nolan from The Dark Knight Rises website also name the company simply as 'Syncopy'. These Inception production notes do the same. -- Allthestrongbowintheworld ( talk) 01:20, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
All companies must have a physical address, seeing that none exists for Syncopy, it is obvious that this company doesn't exist except as a legal representation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 16:15, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
There seems to be an agenda of deception not inception among the editors of this article. Produce the physical location of the business or simply shut up. Every company that legally exists has to do this, do why doesn't Syncopy? Maybe they should rename it Area 51? — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
98.67.161.98 (
talk) 18:59, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
Shoddy reporting. Can't back up your argument with facts, then you fail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 18:18, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Epic Fail. System Failure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 00:36, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Disruption is providing false information over and over. Its funny, you guys keep go back and forth whether the company is British or American, if you cannot even figure that out you should just back off completely. Your computer has encountered a fatal error of conscience and must shut down so that lies will not contaminate other users. I don't like bullies in the real world and I don't like them on a "community" like Wikipedia.
"Delusions" -- wouldn't that constitute an attack on another user? Funny how those attack warnings only seem to work one way?
1. "Syncopy" is cited as a Great Britain production company in IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/company/co0147954/
2. Also, Syncopy now has a Tmblr account and lists the official name as "Syncopy Films" with no "Inc." http://syncopyfilms.tumblr.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 19:51, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
3. "Syncopy Films" has a Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Syncopy-Films/109375539080542 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 19:54, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
The reliability of IMDb for production company information is questionable, per
Wikipedia:Citing IMDb. Syncopy Films' Facebook page is merely a reposting of this Wikipedia article.
Primogen (
talk) 18:13, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Okay,so user 98.67.161.98 clearly seems uninterested in bringing forward a discussion or even an explaination about his recent edits, so it appears I shall have to do so. Firstly, the nationality of the company appears to be in dispute, and with no sources supporting either argument that it is British or American, it should IMO be left out. Secondly, to list the company website as an IMDb profile is frankly laughable and should be removed for obvious reasons. -- Allthestrongbowintheworld ( talk) 21:13, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Look above! It seems you are seriously misinformed and creating doubt where there is none. This entire entry shows how bad Wikipedia has become for real reporting and accurate information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 21:16, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
You seem to have a real chip on your shoulder based on this snide entry and all of your other historical edits. I think you just want to be right, and not provide correct information to the users of this website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 21:41, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Again, you should slow down and take more time. Nowhere in the main article did I cite a Facebook page. Please demonstrate to me how a British GB company is incorporated as a California company, and how dubious documents that list no public information make it into the public records? For 3 months so many of you have wasted your time and time of others playing tug-of-war over dubious and most likely false information. Looking at all of the back and forth history over and over the same information here indicates just plain mischief and nothing that serves this website as a place of factual information. Quote rules all you want, it still doesn't get anyone closer to what real and not real here and the immaturity demonstrated by all on this page is just mind-boggling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 22:07, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Your replies seem more like rants than anything educational or constructive; you should really take a deep breath and think before writing.
Yawn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 13:35, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
You wouldn't know genuine or logical if it was presented to you on a plate. I have never seen such obvious misuse of resources and dialogue until I found these Wikipedia users. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.161.98 ( talk) 01:31, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Pack of wolves who only wish to tear apart every common user on Wikipedia. Look at this horrible page and think about your own behaviors. You play by rules you don't even keep yourself and you bully or group bully anyone you disagree with. I think if someone at Wikipedia looked at your behavior as shown on this page any reasonable person would come to the same conclusion. You do not own Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.67.110.153 ( talk) 12:46, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Can i request that a table be made with the syncopy movies critical reception on metacritic, Roten tomatoes and BFCA??? Poroboros ( talk) 19:19, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
«The next film to be released will be Dunkirk (2017)» -- Tuxayo ( talk) 14:31, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Concerning the company's offical name and headquarters (as discussed above), I've done thorough research and added several new credible sources to the article, including an offical document. Also reworked the lede with additonal information about the name. Best regards, 185.176.244.83 ( talk) 12:18, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
SYNCOPY SY•OP•YNC — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blaczac117 ( talk • contribs) 01:49, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) asilvering ( talk) 22:52, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Syncopy Inc. → Syncopy – For some reason, Syncopy redirects to Syncope (medicine). The former spelling is not mentioned anywhere on the article, and I could find no evidence online that syncopy is anything but a misspelling of syncope. Possibly, the redirect was created as the phonetic spelling of the medical term, since Syncopy Inc. was not created until two years later. As no other article titled "syncopy" currently exists, and syncopy appears to be an uncommon misspelling of syncope, the production company should not need to be disambiguated. InfiniteNexus ( talk) 06:51, 22 March 2024 (UTC)