Talk:Umbrella Corporation

Elite Python
The phrase "Elite Python A modification for a Colt Python .357 Magnum made by Umbrella." is used on multiple websites, and as far as I could see had no source. It is possible that Wikipedia had it first, then other sites just copied the list (the rest of the list is on most of those other sites), which has happened before. However, I have a couple questions... 1. Did it ever have a source? 2. In which game/movie/book/comic/whatever was this "Elite Python" featured? 3. Also, the thing about the RE0 magnum was interesting, but again what's the source? I don't want to just erase any of it, but ... it's all unsourced. In fact, now that I look at it, I don't think the article has any sources at all...

Separate Canon
I think we should sperate all movie cannon from game cannon. Its way too confusing. And update the picture of the BOW developement team.

History... Information
Where is all this history from? It should be listed under ==References==

We need to find more information about this theeres gotta be some more background out there from the other games; it seems liek this all derives from on or 2 games.

and what about hte umbrella corporation as depicted in the resident evil movies? how is the different hte same and so on?
 * from the beginning of the first film: At the beginning of the 21st century, the Umbrella Corporation had become the largest commercial entity in the United States. Nine out of every ten homes contain its products. Its political and financial influence is felt everywhere. In public, it is the world's leading supplier of computer technology, medical products, and healthcare. Unknown, even to its own employees, its massive profits are generated by military technology, genetic experimentation and viral weaponry.

History
I have completly removed "History" seeing as no reference is given and the info is clearly taken from other web-sites, books etc. Example site Please feel free to re-add the section once sources and permission has been granted. Havok (T/C) 23:44, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Wow. It is very stubby without the History section. Optichan 15:01, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * It sure is, I think we should re-add it in; I couldnt find any references to it as from original sources; but im sure its fair use, So im for putting it back in.... --larsinio 15:53, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Seeing as we don't know if it's fair use it should stay down. Not only that, but much of the info was cluttered and repetitive. Feel free to re-write and chop down the history though, maybe write much of it in "your" words.  Havok  (T/C) 23:26, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed. We should keep the history, just condense it. For example, we don't need a header for every date - maybe three sections, like Early History, Later History, and Current History? --User:Morgan695
 * Good idea, I'm for that. Havok  (T/C) 10:41, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Please do not re-add "History", it is believed to be copyright violation. I have checked the history for the the edit, and it was added by Driz at |10:39, on the 16 of April 2005 with no notice if it was his or what not. I have found the same information on www.rehorror.com and, so until the information is found to NOT be in violation of any copyright, it stays off the article. If it is reverted again I will have to report the article as a possible copyright violation. Thank you. Havok (T/C) 18:51, 22 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I am contacting the apparent creator of this history REBORN to find out about the creation of this and obtain permission to use this. You could have done the same thing havok instead of just trying to get people in trouble :P --larsinio 19:14, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm not trying to get people in trouble, I'm sorry if I sounded harsh. But in my eyes it was a clear violation, and as such should not be added until permission is either obtained, or the article is heavily re-written. Sorry if anyone missunderstod my agenda. Havok (T/C) 19:25, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Umbrella in Dino Crisis 2

 * Somebody should have a reference to the Umbrella which was also used in Dino Crisis 2. Empty2005 11:56, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Why? Eluchil  00:44, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Umbrella in the Real World
I don't think the material in this section is relevant or noteworthy enough to be included in this article. It ought to be deleted. Does anyone disagree? If not, I will eventually remove this section. Teflon Don 01:13, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. Teflon Don 06:55, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

you know the umbrella corp is real i done research —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.169.240.211 (talk) 11:47, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

A single Mega-Corporation owning all the other corps. wouldn't advertise its own existence. Anon 23.XI.2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.19.165.71 (talk) 15:01, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

In-Universe tag
I agree with whoever removed the corporation infobox, but how can this article be improved in terms of describing a fictional corporation as such? It notes the company's fictional nature in the first paragraph, it has a section on "Umbrella in other media," and even a mention of Umbrella in the evil megacorporation archetype. Other than adding a list of references (which should be done anyway) or inserting the word "fictional" into every paragraph, what else could be done? Teflon Don 04:26, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * First things first, check out WP:WAF.


 * Then, attribute each claim about Umbrella to a game, and try to describe its development in the real world instead of its fictional development. For example, why is the founding of Umbrella first, when it wasn't revealed until after about at least four games (depending on how many spin-offs you count)? Why are all these "products of Umbrella" and facilities and paramilitary units listed without attribution to a specific game?


 * This article still needs a lot of work, and reads more like a fansite (or, worse yet, an encyclopedia article somehow transported from the RE universe) than an encyclopedia article. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 19:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I took the liberty of rewriting the section on paramilitary units. I don't have as much time as I'd like, so I might not get to any other sections for a while.  Teflon Don 23:20, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks good. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Victory
Remove any more corpoate info boxes and I shall avenge.

Shanequinlan01

Before replacing this infobox, please read WP:WAF, which discourages use of real-world infoboxes on fictional subjects. Please don't add the Corporation infobox to this article. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 07:06, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Spoliers
Two beginnings, no ends. Being as I haven't played the game, I can't close them, but I can snicker at you guysfor not doing it. /snicker. Lovok 13:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

BOW development team
Anyone else think that the BOW Development team photo looks fake and the heads are pllastered on by graphic editing programs? Jamesino 00:46, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

No, because the picture is actually from the first original Resident Evil video game, which is displayed in the labs and in the "Visual Data Room". - *.:.`ShadowFox` S.T.A.R.S..:.* 04:22, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Allusion to Citigroup?
Is there any information on the inspiration for the Umbrella corporation name and logo? I'm thinking Citigroup, since they are the largest company in the world, and have an umbrella logo as well. 165.230.46.150 17:48, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Location
Why is the location in the infobox set as America? It's pretty clearly referenced that there are branches across the globe and it was founded by a European? It is absolutely clear that Umbrella is in Europe, not in the U.K. but in Europe, so please, leave your American patriotism for a while and admit that Umbrella is supposted to be in our continent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.54.29.118 (talk) 12:36, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Point of Origin
Excuse me, I am confused. Where exactly did the Umbrella Corporation originate from. I know it is a world-wide corporation. I just don't think it was in France. Perhaps I am wrong as I might very well be. Nevertheless, my understanding was that it was founded in the Americas...more specifically in the United States. After all, isn't that why "Racoon City" was founded. I can only think of a few possibilities:

1) It is a corporation originally headquartered in the United States in the founded location of Racoon City.

2) It is a corporation originally headquartered in the United States founded in another location other than Racoon City.

3) It is a corporation originally headquartered in Europe. (Where exactly would it have originated from? From France? I don't recall seeing France in the picture. Please remind me.)

4) It is a corporation originally headquartered in another location not mentioned above.

I know there are other facilities in other diverse location (Arklay Mountains, etc.) I want to know the corporations point of origin. Any help would be greatly appreciated! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.213.170.39 (talk) 23:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC).


 * Frankly, I don't know where this bizarre info came from either. Certainly, there is a Paris Laboratory, but I have not seen anything to suggest that the headquarters is there. Wolf ODonnell 16:28, 12 August 2007 (UTC)


 * In the games, Chris set off to take down the Umbrella HQ in "Europe". Parjay ► Talk 16:29, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. It could have been in Spain, for all we know. I'm removing all references to Umbrella's HQ being in Paris. Wolf ODonnell 13:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Logo
HI, Any chance we could get the Umbrella Logo implanted into the Info box? [Pagren 01/07/07]

Fair use rationale for Image:UBCS mark.PNG
Image:UBCS mark.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 10:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Spencer estate front.jpg
Image:Spencer estate front.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Who is the vandal that destroyed U.B.C.S. article?
Alright, explain why the U.B.C.S. article was destroyed (literally! It wasn't even merged with the Umbrella Corporation article. --Kurt Leyman (talk) 22:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:MTR UMBUspirim.jpg
Image:MTR UMBUspirim.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Anon IP POV pushing
86.143.125.14 seems rather obsessed with pushing his own views of what was used to destroy the city on this article and the Raccoon City article. No sources given. Geoff B (talk) 22:24, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any sources from you. You are putting out of date info on pages I am correcting it and will continue to do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.125.14 (talk) 22:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)


 * My sources are the games themselves. The games show a missile or missiles being launched at Raccoon City.  None of the games show a bomb being dropped.  So, where's your source?  Geoff B (talk) 22:55, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

My sources are also the game themselves and the more recent ones. A fuel air bomb can be deployed in as a bomb droped from a plane or lauched in a missile. RE4 shoes this as the bomb at the starts blast radiuce is to small to ba a nuke ( or one of any use in stopping an out break ) and there is no EMP. UC also says that it is a conventioal missile that deastroys raccoon. The only convential missle that air bursts is a fuel air bomb. Your edits are vandalium and I will remove them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.125.14 (talk) 23:34, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

RE4 shoes this as the bomb at the starts blast radiuce is to small to ba a nuke ( or one of any use in stopping an out break ) and there is no EMP. - This is original research, unless you are a nuclear weapons expert and have a particular work of yours you can quote. The only convential missle that air bursts is a fuel air bomb. - This is just plain wrong. There are plenty of explosive weapons, from the man-portable on upwards, that are capable of airbursting. And a missile is not a bomb. Geoff B (talk) 01:01, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

No mention of Umbrella's history as it appears in the films.
The information in the article appears to be exclusivly about Umbrella's history in the games. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.230.237.156 (talk) 23:07, 6 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Considering that we know almost nothing on Umbrella in the films, what other reasons do you have?-- OsirisV (talk) 11:56, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Listed AFD
I read the article and talk and see problems but it was tagged AfD. The reasoning is no Google search hits and no 3rd party verification, although apparently at least one was found, along with other problems (see: #Umbrella Corporation ). I have seen that certain violations have been dealt with (image violations, POV, etc...) but do feel the title should be, Umbrella Corporation (Fictional game), as I dislike getting such unwarranted hits on a search result. This would also deal with the above mentioned statement concerning the use of "fictional" at every turn. This is not the main problem and will not matter if the article is deleted.
 * As the problems listed on the AfD are fixable this means that someone should take an interest or risk possible deletion. I have weighed in on "tag removal" only on the grounds that I feel the tag was premature, and not per Wikipedia accepted process, which would include appropriate tags for issues and resolution or not. Otr500 (talk) 00:24, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 19 February 2017
should be added to the page. George Ho (talk) 04:03, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Also, should be added. George Ho (talk) 04:15, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ — xaosflux  Talk 04:48, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 30 August 2023
Please remove R fully protected. It is handled by the banner template and at the moment twice on the list. Christian75 (talk) 13:41, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 20:57, 30 August 2023 (UTC)