Talk:Rare (company)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleRare (company) has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 14, 2016Guild of Copy EditorsCopyedited
January 30, 2016Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 23, 2016.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Rare celebrated its 30th anniversary by releasing Rare Replay, a title compiling 30 video games which it created?
Current status: Good article

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 76 external links on Rare (company). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:36, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Rare (company). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Rare (company). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:58, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Rareware" fan nickname appearing in first sentence[edit]

It is not appropriate for a fan nickname to be in the very first sentence of an article for a major games company. The company has never gone by "Rareware"; their name has always been 'Rare' with their legal name having always been 'Rare Limited' (often shortened to 'Rare Ltd.'). They have had many different trade names for various endeavors such as 'Rare Coin-It Toys and Games Inc.', 'Rare Coin-It', and 'Rare Coin Games, Inc.', but they have never used 'Rareware' as a trade name even once. Yes, many people in the 1990s erroneously called them "Rareware" due to the Rareware emblem appearing on their games from 1994 to 2003 ("Rareware" literally meaning "Rare+software" or "software by Rare"), but they have never operated under this name and it is not appropriate for a fan name to be in the first sentence of the article. There is a perfect place for this to be mentioned in the section titled 'Partnership with Nintendo (1994–2002)'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RdCrestdBreegull (talk • contribs) 03:00, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:COMMONNAME. Also, your claim that "Rareware" refers to the games is WP:OR. I found a good chunk of reliable sources ([1][2][3][4][5]) that used the name to refer to the developer, so it's clearly common in use. JOEBRO64 03:08, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You cannot use someone's incorrect use of "Rareware" as the company name as a source. Every single one of the games that has the Rareware emblem says 'Game by Rare' on the box. They have never once referred to themselves as "Rareware" -- the actual games are the Rareware. Plenty of people do not know better, and yes many articles erroneously use the term, but that does not make it correct or appropriate for the first sentence of a factual Wikipedia page. The company name is Rare, and it would be very appropriate to mention that yes, they used the Rareware emblem on their games from 1994-2003, in the appropriate section which is not the first section. There is not a single Rare or Nintendo document or promotional material that uses the term 'Rareware' other than referring to the Rareware logo (i.e. 'The Rareware logo is a trademark of Rare') yet there are hundreds of instances of both Rare and Nintendo referring to the company as 'Rare'; fans referring to them as 'Rareware' comes from a misunderstanding of their software branding/marketing. RdCrestdBreegull (talk) 03:30, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia does not exist to right great wrongs. Since Rare was commonly referred to with the epithet "Rareware" (and continues to be among some), it should be noted. Again, your justification is entirely rooted in WP:OR. JOEBRO64 03:31, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Rare Limited was always referred to as such, internal documents as seen here: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EsZ9oA3XIAAtD45?format=png refer to the company was Rare Limited. Rare Ltd was never referred to as Rareware by Nintendo, You can see that several of their games on the on the official Nintendo website refer to Rare as Rare Limited: https://web.archive.org/web/20020204040759/http://www.nintendo.com/games/gamepage/gamepage_main.jsp?gameId=53. Rareware is the name of their products and not of the company. It is only called that by fans, not internally or officially.Rare even answers this question of their Q&A Rare Scribes: https://rarewhere.neocities.org/1998_2000/june1900.html 2600:8804:1603:AC00:A5E1:25DC:9CA9:3690 (talk) 03:39, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hundreds of internal and public documents and promotional materials is well beyond covered under the "reliable, published sources" that WP:OR cites (again, there is not a single, and I mean not even one, document, game, or anything at all from Nintendo or Rare that uses "Rareware" for anything other than legal text mentioning that the Rareware logo is a trademark of Rare), not to mention the explanation given by Leigh Loveday, the face of Rare themselves and one of the longest-running employees at Rare, given by the above user that "Rareware" is the [games] they produce and not the actual company name. This also does not fall under the context of WP:COMMONNAME which refers to the title of an article. This does also not fall under the category of "righting great wrongs" per the explanation given on that page. This is merely stating that the intro to a games company's page should not use the erroneous fan-given name that is based on a misunderstanding, and saying that that information can go elsewhere in the article such as in the 1994-2003 section. RdCrestdBreegull (talk) 03:50, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
First, please log in while you edit. Second, the start of the article doesn't imply that Rare was ever called Rareware, just that they were known as that (which they were). This is a non-issue. JOEBRO64 03:58, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You say it's a non-issue, however, a wikipedia article should require factual statements only. The company is not Rareware, if anything a correction should be stated such as "Incorrectly referred to as Rareware".2600:8804:1603:AC00:A5E1:25DC:9CA9:3690 (talk) 04:06, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it is important to include the fact that they were called "Rareware" by many fans, but like the above user is saying this information needs to be mentioned alongside that they were called this erroneously or something like "due to the Rareware software-designating emblem on their games, many fans erroneously referred to them as "Rareware" especially during the 1994-2003 period". And I believe this information would go perfectly in the Nintendo 1994-2003 section. It is not appropriate for the opening sentence for a 40-year-old video game company to use a fan-name people called them in the '90s. RdCrestdBreegull (talk) 04:43, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
According to this, Rareware was their name during the Nintendo period, but I agree that this really isn't appropriate for the lead. "Also known as" implies that this is an alternate title for the studio now, but this isn't true. Rare is already the common name and we don't really need to have another common name that is not so common now listed alongside it. OceanHok (talk) 12:16, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree that it isn't appropriate to include the term on its own in the lead. I can understand that the use of Rareware to refer to the company is prominent and widely known, but as it has been pointed out, it is not factually correct and should be addressed further down in the article. Having it in the first sentence with no context will only further the erroneous use. If you want to keep it in the first sentence, then it should be phrased in such a way as to reflect that the company is erroneously or colloquially referred to by its software brand name. Jeph86 (talk) 22:27, 27 January 2021 (UTC)jeph86[reply]
OceanHok perhaps you have given the wrong link? Because that article does not include the name 'Rareware' anywhere. And even if it did it would still be inaccurate. The recent change to the opening sentence is much better, but it is still inaccurate because the colloquial use of "Rareware" to refer to the company, although prevalent in the mid-'90s and much of the '00s due to people recognizing the company through their Rareware software emblem, has all but faded away in 2021 and is rarely ever used. I really just don't think in 2021 it makes sense to have that in the opening sentence and feel that it is best left where it already is later on the article ("During this period, Rare started selling their games under the trademark name "Rareware"."). The opening sentence should really only mention "Rare Limited" and "Rare"; it could say something like "Rare, doing business as Rare Limited,..." or "Rare Limited, operating under the trade name Rare,...". Honestly not sure the best way to word it though, but I just don't see how a colloquialism that is no longer in popular/widespread use has a place in the very opening sentence. Anyone have any ideas? RdCrestdBreegull (talk) 03:57, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree that "Rareware" is not a proper name for Rare, but it is going to be a search term for the company and per WP's approach on redirects/search term, we should try to identify why people searching on "Rareware" are ending up here. My suggesting is to delegate the Rareware colloqual name to a footname. --Masem (t) 04:34, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that 'Rareware' should absolutely redirect to the Rare (company) page when entered into Wikipedia. I am not familiar with the term 'footname'. RdCrestdBreegull (talk) 04:10, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What's with Wikipedia calling English things as "British"?[edit]

British is an identity, not a nationality. British is such a vague term, an unhelpful one too. You don't call Alexander Graham Bell as "British born", you rightfully recognise things as Welsh, Scottish or Northern Irish so why do the rules change here?

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rare_(company)&oldid=1207164672"