Talk:Funimation/Archive 1

Founding date[edit]

In the first section of the article: "FUNimation was founded in 1998" but everywhere else it says 1994. 184.166.26.1 (talk) 03:12, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will look up the history for this,I know this is from 2011.Jbegle (talk) 03:11, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Navarre corp not defunct[edit]

The company Navarre Corporation is not defunct They just reorganized and had a name change per their Wikipedia page [1] , Navarre sold Sold Funimation in 2011 I do not know what I would need to change on there under that section. Jbegle (talk) 03:18, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Sony/Funimation deal[edit]

The deal for SPE to acquire Funimation hasn't closed yet. Therefore, Funimation is not a subsidiary of SPE until the sale is complete. You may not know if the day may fall apart. Just because SPE announced to acquire majority of it, doesn't mean that they now own it. If a company announced plans to take most, some, or all of a company before the sale is complete, then it's not a subsidiary. King Shadeed 13:56, August 3, 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Funimation. 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) 23:42, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mylstar/Funimation[edit]

Mylstar and Funimation should have Introduced themselves.--2600:1702:4B28:F760:E9CD:6C21:A26F:E7BA (talk) 19:42, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming of article[edit]

I suggest that the name of the article be amended to FUNimation Entertainment as this is a more accurate appellation. Ouranista (talk) 14:57, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ouranista: I Oppose that. They style it like 'Funimation' on their Twitter when they need to say "coming to Funimation", as seen here. Anime News Network and Crunchyroll also style it the same way, as seen here and here. That is enough to show the name they are most known by is 'Funimation', so under WP:AT the page will be named accordingly. Link20XX (talk) 15:52, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Opposed per MOS:TMRULES -- ferret (talk) 21:58, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. Just be aware that Google uses FUNimation Entertainment despite the name being "outdated." Ouranista (talk) 04:51, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The only place that I can find that uses it is the Anime News Network's encyclopedia, which like Wikipedia is an encyclopedia anyone can edit, thus it is not a reliable source. Plus there is also MOS:TMRULES, like ferret said above. Link20XX (talk) 19:28, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/redirect proposal of FunimationNow[edit]

I propose that FunimationNow is to be merged and redirected to Funimation for WP:N. FunimationNow is not notable on its own, and almost everything on the FunimationNow page is just copied 1:1 from the Funimation page, having extremely strong overlap (WP:OVERLAP). The article seems to have been created after the AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Funimation Channel (2nd nomination), which resulted in redirect, and I think it might be from the same unregistered user. Additionally, the title of the article is inaccurate, as Funimation had discontinued the FunimationNow name sometime at the end of 2019/beginning of 2020, with this article being the last published article whereby Funimation referred to its streaming service as FunimationNow. tenshibeat (talk|contribs) 16:41, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Redirecting per nom. There is nothing in that article that isn't already in this article. Also if an admin is seeing this, can you salt the redirects to this page please? Link20XX (talk) 16:52, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Redirecting Funimation as a subscription service is Funimation's main focus as a business - I don't see a good reason why the service should be covered independently from the company that bears its name, as things stand today there's simply no need for duplicate coverage. Canadianerk (talk) 11:18, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because FunimationNow is notable enough to have its own article. —ÐW^(T·C) 13:27, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm redirecting it. The same IP is indeed responsible for both FunimationNow and Funimation Channel. This is pretty clearly circumventing the AFD consensus. FunimationNow was unredirected the day after the AFD concluded and redirected the former. -- ferret (talk) 13:37, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 March 2022[edit]

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.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Sceptre (talk) 01:48, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Funimation → Crunchyroll, LLC – As of March 1, 2022, Funimation Global Group, LLC was renamed to Crunchyroll, LLC. As such, this page should be renamed to the new company name, whilst Crunchyroll (Crunchyroll, Inc) remains the article about the streaming service itself, given that both articles are about different (but overlapping) things, and the press release is referring to the Funimation Global Group/Crunchyroll LLC company, rather than Crunchyroll, Inc. Because of this, changing tenses on this page to past tense would be inaccurate as this company would still exist as the parent company for Crunchyroll streaming service and its subsidiaries, and therefore renaming to the new name would distinguish Crunchyroll the streaming service to Crunchyroll, LLC the company. tenshibeat (talk|contribs) 15:09, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Even says the Funimation brand is being phased out in favor of Crunchyroll. However, i would make note that this was the company formerly known as Funimation. https://variety.com/2022/digital/news/crunchyroll-adds-funimation-anime-sony-1235192876/24.47.203.20 (talk) 17:52, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support in part I agree that a change needs to be made. The Funimation brand might be going away and it might be folding into Crunchyroll but I feel like trying to merge the histories of pre-merger Funimation and Crunchyroll into the same page would be unwieldy. The nature of the merger and branding change is necessarily convoluted because Funimation Global Group/the LLC is legally distinct from Sony. That's because of the 5% share still held by Gen Fukunaga. I think we might want to look to the pages for Yahoo! Inc. (1995–2017), Yahoo! and Yahoo (2017-present) (and all the related companies like Altaba and Yahoo! Japan) for guidance. There's disambiguation text and a link to a disambiguation page. I propose we retain this as a page about pre-merger Funimation or about the history of Funimation and either create a new page for Crunchyroll, LLC or have a link atop the history section of Crunchyroll's page sending people back to this page for the history of Funimation.--Aresef (talk) 18:29, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:Could this be like how the Atari name has been used across different subsidiaries today? Also, defunct companies folded thanks to mergers still have their own articles, like both iterations of Viacom, so I think it should be reminded that this is just a move request. Not a merger request. Funimation and Crunchyroll should not be the same article. I'm also wondering how to log the closure of the streaming service on 2022 in American television--CreecregofLife (talk) 20:28, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Split instead of moving. Funimation, the streaming service, should have its own page. O.N.R. ^(talk) 23:58, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - agree with the above that the legacy Funimation streaming service/company should have its own page. As such, oppose the move for the time being. -- Netoholic @ 03:01, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: We're still not sure which parts of Funimation will continue to operate under the Funimation brand, if any. (For example, their FAQ says their Funimation Shop will remain open.) All we know for certain is that the streaming portion of their business is shutting down and migrating to Crunchyroll. I also believe we should keep a legacy page for Funimation even if it turns out that no part of the current company will retain the name. — Gestrid (talk) 03:28, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose in part: I think we need further details on what exactly is going to become of Funimation in light of this new merger. For now I'm supporting the legacy page, mainly because the joining of the two companies while keeping only one name reminds me of the United Airlines and Continental Airlines merger; United kept its page while Continental got a legacy page. However, I think we need to find out more specifics on what will go where before we can decide.Mumbai0618 (talk) 05:50, 2 March 2022 (UTC)Mumbai0618[reply]

Oppose - Just because Funimation is now defunct doesn't mean that historically it wasn't its own company... ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:04, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But it's not defunct. It renamed. The better question may be: Is this article about the brand, or the company? Or is that where a split needs to happen? The brand is becoming defunct. The company is simply renamed. -- ferret (talk) 14:52, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Split The company Funimation, as well as it's streaming service, should retain to have its own page, with a new page to be created for the company as well as the service. User:WeldingF ^(talk) 23:58, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now. The Funimation streaming service still exists, and it's not entirely clear how the company's home video and dubbing studio branches will brand themselves going forward. I think that Crunchyroll's phrasing ("initiated rebranding across its global footprint") is somewhat ambiguous. LostTL (talk) 16:54, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. I'll restate a reply I put above: The better question may be: Is this article about the brand, or the company? Or is that where a split needs to happen? The brand is becoming defunct. The company is simply renamed.. !votes in this discussion seem to vary in referring to the company, or the brand. The company as an entity hasn't gone anywhere, it simply renamed. The service known as Funimation, however, is in spin down to close. Parts of the brand may remain. What is this article ultimately about? If it's about the company, it should be renamed. If it's about the brand, it should not be. If it's about both, perhaps a split is necessary instead. -- ferret (talk) 17:13, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose moving the page since at present the page covers both the company and service. No opposition to a split and/or a separate article for Crunchyroll, LLC being created. Link20XX (talk) 23:31, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose FUNimation was a company and as such, at the very least, its history as a company should be retained. Crunchyroll's page can be made to reflect how it absorbed all things FUNimation. AstroNerdBoy (talk) 00:54, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This misses the point. Funimation is a company that has just renamed itself to Crunchyroll, LLC. Crunchyroll, the company that Funimation recently bought, is Cruncyroll, Inc. -- ferret (talk) 02:51, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But Funimation as it was a week ago already wasn't just Funimation. It was Wakanim, it was Madman etc. It's kind of like how Verizon bought Aol and Aol, combined with Yahoo, became Oath (then Verizon Media, then Yahoo). Or, like someone else pointed out, United Airlines and Continental Airlines have their own pages, and there's a separate page all about United's history, and another one for United Airlines Holdings (which until recently, was called United Continental Holdings). So maybe a split would be the better call.Aresef (talk) 22:17, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The terminology is very picky through the absorption article, but Funimation should at the very least have a page of its own just for the company's history alone.--GalaxyFighter55 (talk) 03:59, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now details of what will be kept and discarded from the merge is not apparent yet as the details are still being worked out, if anything I agree with GalaxyFighter55's idea to keep the article for the historical sake. Inter&anthro (talk) 05:20, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Funimation is older than Crunchyroll by many years and has been the biggest source of English dub in the world for decades. It has a large cultural presence and historical significance. It should get a page just for that alone.Josephgomes619 (talk) 22:13, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and revert changes to the article that presuppose this move. Nomination rationale completely ignores policy as does nearly all of the discussion above. Andrewa (talk) 17:27, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree with the revert suggestion. The company has renamed, period. That's official and documented. -- ferret (talk) 16:49, 9 March 2022 (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.

Service vs Company[edit]

A critical issue in the failed move request is whether or not this article is meant to cover the brand, Funimation, or the company, Cruncyroll, LLC (formerly Funimation Global Group). Following the closure of the move request, the Funimation logo was restored on the basis that it is the logo at funimation.com currently. This is the service however, not the company. If you scroll down, you'll see that it says it's owned by Crunchyroll, LLC. And if you click About Us, you no longer get a page at Funimation.com but are sent to Crunchyroll.com where the CR logo is used, indicating the company logo is indeed the CR logo. Funimation.com itself is slated to discontinue as a service soon.

So, there's needs to be made a determination on what this page represents. Is it the brand? Is it the company? Is it trying to be both? The company will continue as the parent of Crunchyroll, Inc. The service will likely end entirely within a few months, though no date is announced. They have already directed users to cancel their subscriptions and transfer to CR's.

If this page represents the brand specifically, a lot of company details need split to Crunchyroll, LLC (currently a redirect). If it's about the company, the question is, is the Brand independently notable and should be split off? Or does the chapter simply close? -- ferret (talk) 20:13, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It will be strange to have two articles about Crunchyroll. This article is more about a service (Funimation) that will soon cease to exist. Information about Crunchyroll LLC. should continue in an article about Crunchyroll. I didn't find any information about Crunchyroll Inc. on the Crunchyroll website. Aoito (talk) 22:01, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But the company formerly known as Funimation shouldn’t lose its article just because of corporate reorganization--CreecregofLife (talk) 22:03, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. If Funimation, the company, was notable before, it has not ceased to be notable just because it renamed. That two related companies share names is not "strange", it simply is. They are still distinct entities despite it. That's what hatnotes are for. -- ferret (talk) 22:10, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article will remain as Funimation, but the information about the service (Crunchyroll LLC.) should continue in the Crunchyroll article. We cannot duplicate future information about Crunchyroll in two articles. Aoito (talk) 22:12, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are confusing topics, which was the entire reason I opened this section to address. Crunchroll, LLC, is not a service. It's the company formerly known as Funimation Global Group. Crunchyroll is not about Funimation Global Group, who's entire history is on this article. There are four distinct topics, which are currently covered in two articles. Crunchroll, LLC (a company, formerly Funimation Global), Funimation (a streaming service/publishing label), Crunchyroll, Inc (A company purchased by Funimation Global), and Crunchyroll (A streaming service/publishing label) -- ferret (talk) 22:18, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, now I understand. Aoito (talk) 23:01, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article is meant to cover the service more than the company, hence why I favored a split in the requested move. Funimation (the service) is still notable, even if it will cease to exist. Funimation (the company) was renamed to Crunchyroll, LLC, which I believe to be a separate topic that is notable in its own right. I feel it is also worth mentioning that de:Crunchyroll (Unternehmen) (Crunchyroll (company)) exists on the German Wikipedia. Link20XX (talk) 23:26, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The DE example is a little weird, as "Crunchroll" as a name covers two companies. Which company are they covered? I think you have the right of it though. This page should cover the soon-to-be-defunct service and publishing label. And the parts purely focused on the company should be split to Crunchyroll, LLC. -- ferret (talk) 23:32, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So, I guess since there seems to consensus for a split (at the very least there is no opposition for it) so I guess we should decide exactly what parts of this article should be split and create a draft. Link20XX (talk) 16:55, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and created Draft:Crunchyroll, LLC with some of the content I feel is relevant to the company. Feel free to add or remove content as necessary. Link20XX (talk) 17:40, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

At a glance, this looks like a solid start. The question is, what would stay behind? Maybe a draft version of Funimation, "the service", as well, if you have time. -- ferret (talk) 21:59, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just created Draft:Funimation for what the Funimation article could look like. Any improvements would be appreciated. Link20XX (talk) 23:25, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Too many articles about Crunchyroll[edit]

When there is a complete rebranding, we will have many articles of the same brand: Crunchyroll Inc., Crunchyroll EMEA, Crunchyroll LLC., Crunchyroll UK and Ireland, Crunchyroll SAS. What do you think about it? Aoito (talk) 20:24, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's a non-issue. We sometimes have lots of similarly named articles. That various topics have similar names does not disqualify them from having an article. That is what disambiguation is for, especially WP:NATDIS which most of these have. -- ferret (talk) 20:30, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you watch Humongous Entertainment retrospectives, you'll find that the Atari name had a very similar fate, plastered over very confusingly named subsidiaries all over--CreecregofLife (talk) 20:57, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Incidentally, Atari Interactive is currently having a split/move discussion as well) -- ferret (talk) 21:12, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That isn't even all the articles with "Crunchyroll" in the title that exist, there is also Crunchyroll Manga, Crunchyroll Expo, and Crunchyroll Anime Awards; though like was stated above, this is a non-issue. Category:Yahoo! is another situation with a ton of articles sharing a portion of the title. That being said, there is a lot of pages with Crunchyroll in the name, so perhaps a disambiguation page is in order. Link20XX (talk) 21:15, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"FUNimation® Productions, Ltd." listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect FUNimation® Productions, Ltd. and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 15#FUNimation® Productions, Ltd. until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. BD2412 T 05:00, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Split some section into its own history[edit]

I propose that some parts of the history section in Funimation and Crunchyroll be split into a separate page called either History of Crunchyroll or History of Funimation. The content of the current page needs to be downsized and these sections are large enough to make their own page. 76.68.77.114 (talk) 03:20, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no issue with this proposal, it seems like a good idea. However I'd rather suggest it be perhaps titled something like History of anime streaming services, or perhaps to be more general, History of international anime distribution, so that it may encompass not only the Crunchyroll-Funimation merging and their history as competitors (which would obviously be a major part of such an article), but also their other past and present competitors, and the previously unexploited demand that pirate distributors capitalized on before their rise to prominence. At least some of this history is already covered in articles like List of anime distributed in the United States (where I really wasn't expecting to find it, and only did so because Anime in the United States redirects to it- it may be somewhat WP:OFFTOPIC there) and it could probably be further expanded on. Joyce-stick (talk) 07:37, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that split is necessary as the readable prose does not severely exceed the 50 kb limit at WP:SPLIT. On the topic of splitting, both here and at Talk:Crunchyroll it has been proposed to split Funimation (the company, which is now Crunchyroll, LLC) from this article, which may in-turn help with any size issues. Link20XX (talk) 14:49, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For the time being our consensus at Talk:Crunchyroll#Fixing the Crunchyroll/Funimation article situation seems to be to change the Crunchyroll and Funimation articles to be about the streaming services and their history, and work Crunchyroll, LLC and Crunchyroll, Inc into new, separate articles about the companies.

I've created an "History of international anime distribution" draft in my userspace spinning off the generally accurate appearing but unsourced and off-topic content on the subject from List of anime distributed in the United States (which is probably not really a necessary article, it makes more sense at this point in time to list the anime not distributed in the United States, but that's another separate topic). I'll work on that myself and may later submit it as a draft at Wikipedia:Articles for Creation when it's in a presentable condition, but for now the priority should be to clean up and split the existing articles as has been currently agreed. Joyce-stick (talk) 21:29, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 25 August 2022[edit]

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.

The result of the move request was: Not moved — Amakuru (talk) 10:37, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Funimation → Crunchyroll
Crunchyroll → Crunchyroll (streaming service)

– Crunchyroll is the name formerly known as Funimation. Moving Crunchyroll to Crunchyroll (streaming service) will distinguish between the service and the company. See Talk:Crunchyroll for debates. —-76.68.77.79 (talk) 00:09, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as per the previous RM and above discussions. Funimation (the service) is a different topic than Funimation the Company (now Crunchyroll, LLC), which makes it just as worthy for an article as anything else. That is why it was determined that a split is better rather than a page move. Additionally, the streaming service is the primary topic over the company as most articles focus on that, so if anything Crunchyroll should be about the service and Crunchyroll, LLC about the company. The Funimation page should be reworked into an article about the Funimation streaming service, which is currently being merged into Crunchyroll's streaming service. Link20XX (talk) 03:52, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Objection/comment: May I just remind you, per WP:CORP, Crunchyroll is just the new name for Funimation (no LLC), like SBC used the AT&T name. This is not quite exactly what the name "Crunchyroll" means: The current company that uses CR, was founded in 1994 as Funimation, while the OG CR started in 2006 then through ownership changes until it was bought by Sony, Funimation began to use the CR name going forward but the entity retains the staff from Funimation. Even Funimation prior to streaming did release shows on home video as well. —--184.146.37.152 (talk) 05:24, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While yes, the Funimation company is now Crunchyroll, that doesn't mean that the Funimation service can't have an article; it is a completely different topic after all. This is exactly why a split is preferred; both Crunchyroll, LLC (formerly Funimation Global Group; the LLC in the name is part of the legal name that serves as a good natural disambiguator) and Funimation streaming service are completely separate topics, both of which could warrant an article. While there was (and possibly still is) another company named Crunchyroll, Inc., this is a completely separate entity and has little to no bearing on the current company. Link20XX (talk) 05:51, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose move. It's been (almost) six months, and nothing's changed. O.N.R. ^(talk) 05:02, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If SONY own both Funimation and Crunchyroll, isn't Funimation suppose to be retired so the name can be replaced by Crunchyroll instead? We can't find the evidence on whether Funimation was getting rebrand or selling out to another competitors. – VernardoLau (talk) 14:25, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Sony does own both Funimation and Crunchyroll. They have previously stated that they intend to phase out the Funimation brand completely in favor of Crunchyroll. So yes, there is evidence that Funimation is getting rebranded and is very unlikely to be sold. Link20XX (talk) 14:50, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - This is the basic info about the companies as of August 2022. Funimation Global Group, LLC. is a joint venture between Sony Corporation's Sony Pictures Entertainment (US) and Sony Music (Japan) subsidiaries. The purchase of Crunchyroll from AT&T/WarnerMedia was made through Sony's Funimation Global Group. [2][3] Starting on April 1, 2022 Sony began the process of rebranding & merging Funimation, VRV and Wakanim into Crunchyroll (streaming service). Those three streaming services are remaining operational while the merger is in progress. This press release from Sony clearly clarifies that Funimation Global Group, LLC. (the topic of this article) is now operating under the legal name of Crunchyroll, LLC.. The company's May 2022 Blu-Ray/DVD releases were the last to use the Funimation branding and name. The Crunchyroll name and brand is now applied to the company's physical media releases starting in June 2022.[4]
  As far as Wikipedia goes the article titled Funimation currently reads about the company's history when it was known as Funimaiton Global Group, LLC. as per the header. The current Crunchyroll article is a hot mess trying to serve as the primary article for Crunchyroll the company as it existed prior to the Sony/Funimation purchase, the rebranded & merged Crunchyroll company and the Crunchyroll streaming service.
  
  What I think Wikipedia needs to do is adopt the format currently employed by Freeform (TV channel) where an article titled Crunchyroll will act as the company article from Funimation's founding to the present. A new article titled History of Crunchyroll can be created that can go into more detail about the history of Funimation, Funimation Channel and Funimation (streaming service) with a small section acting as an overview for a third article titled Crunchyroll (streaming service) which will focus on the streaming service. Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 02:47, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think that the streaming service article should be titled Crunchyroll and the company article Crunchyroll, LLC as it seems to be the norm to have the product/service at the base name and the company disambiguated, see HBO vs Home Box Office, Inc. or Roku vs Roku, Inc. Link20XX (talk) 02:57, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    - I'd everyone prefer to Support the name changes, even you Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} per WP:CORP. —199.7.156.243 (talk) 22:33, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      - I am not sure if this sort of renaming is the best move, however, it should be noted we already have Crunchyroll UK and Ireland (formerly Manga Entertainment and Funimation UK and Ireland), Crunchyroll GmbH (formerly AV Visionen of Germany), Crunchyroll EMEA (formerly Viz Media Europe) and Crunchyroll Pty. Ltd. (formerly Madman Anime of Australian). This strongly suggests that Wakanim will become some incarnation of Crunchyroll France (or merged into Crunchyroll EMEA which is also headquartered in France along with the likes of Kazé which is also gaining the Crunchyroll branding) and at some point the name "Funimation" in all its former forms will be relegated to historical content. I would also not be surprised if Aniplex of America gets merged into the new Crunchyroll, LLC (former Funimation). For whatever reason, Sony and Aniplex are betting on the "Crunchyroll" name. For these reasons, I agree that Funimation needs to be renamed and Crunchyroll's organization history moved to a section of that (potentially split out based on size of content). I believe the current Crunchyroll should not change names but be dedicated to the anime streaming service website. —Uzume (talk) 18:55, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the streaming service is the primary topic, not this company -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 06:44, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- That is not even the case and how it works. If you read above you, Crunchyroll is the company's name that was called Funimation run by the same staff as Funimation., so why oppose? May 2022 was the last time physical media releases were under the Funimation label, and the company began to use the Crunchyroll label the next month. -199.7.156.243 (talk) 22:33, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - No, that is not how Wikipedia works. Read WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. The request is to usurp a primary topic. WP:CORP has nothing to do with usurping a primary topic, which is what this request is. Choose a different name for the company, one that follows WP:DISAMBIGUATION because this request does not, as it is not a primary topic. -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 00:16, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    - Absolutely false. Funimation taking Crunchyroll's name is how similar to SBC taking AT&T's name in 2005. Think outside the box for a change. —-199.7.157.8 (talk) 05:03, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      - If you don't like WP:PRIMARYTOPIC then get it changed. You can't seem to think beyond your personal opinion in this matter. -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 09:17, 30 August 2022 (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.

Requested move 13 September 2022[edit]

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.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 03:41, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Funimation → Crunchyroll
Crunchyroll → Crunchyroll (streaming service)

– As mentioned, Crunchyroll is now the corporate name for Funimation and the visual chart confirms it. This may be the last attempt until we put the move on hold for 4-6 months or one year under WP:MORATORIUM. 76.68.77.79 (talk) 20:55, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy close; exactly the same as the previous move that was closed not even a month ago. Link20XX (talk) 22:07, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy close; I wholeheartedly agree. Opening another such request so soon after it was just decided is basically a reopen request which is pointless and reeks of trying to weasel around the former decision. —Uzume (talk) 17:43, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per user's argument. —theMainLogan (talk) 17:44, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy close per arguments mentioned above. Shorouq★The★Super★ninja2 (talk) 12:35, 18 September 2022 (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.

WP:MORATORIUM[edit]

If the move is closed again, who wants to vote in a moratorium to halt moving for 6 months to one year. -76.68.77.79 (talk) 22:14, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I never said moves were not warranted—but the suggested moves are ill advised in my opinion (and apparently also in those of the others that made similar statements). I am for renaming Funimation (since it has actually changed names) but I really do not see the point in renaming Crunchyroll. Crunchyroll is still the most iconic use of that name. Doing something like moving Funimation to Crunchyroll, LLC or the like and adding a dab hatnote to the top of Crunchyroll seems quite appropriate to me. There have also been proposals for contents splits, e.g., I particularly like where Draft:Crunchyroll, LLC is going and I would not be opposed to someone doing something similar for Crunchyroll, Inc., etc. —Uzume (talk) 05:32, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer Funimation to be renamed to simply Crunchyroll per WP:CORP and the Crunchyroll streaming service itself as "Crunchyroll (streaming service)" to distinguish between the company and the service. -76.68.77.79 (talk) 09:59, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 January 2023[edit]

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.

The result of the move request was: not moved. but the nominator or others may want to pursue a split, which they can do at WP:PROPSPLIT (closed by non-admin page mover) echidnaLives - talk - edits 01:47, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Funimation → Crunchyroll, LLC – The article uses the Crunchyroll logo and name so we should finally rename the title. Kevin ^Talk 00:54, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral While the nominator's rationale is weak and the previous RM on this topic was ultimately closed with a split being ideal, which I still agree is ideal. However, this page has become more Crunchyroll, LLC-focused since the original move. Perhaps the best option is to move and create a new article at the Funimation title about the streaming service as a split of this article. Ultimately, I have no real opinion on which is preferable. Link20XX (talk) 01:54, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy close, but would support a split. This is the fourth move request in less than a year, and the rationale hasn't significantly changed since last time. A split is warranted just so we won't have to go through this a fifth time. O.N.R. ^(talk) 14:33, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Agreed about the split sounds like the best option Kevin ^Talk 08:31, 12 January 2023 (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.