Site Forum

I'm asking specifically about sets produced by W.D. & H.O. Wills Ltd.  We have many of their sets listed on TCDB, with more being added all the time. However, we lack a standard naming convention. I have seen their sets titled as (Using the "Animals and Birds" series as an example):

• W.D. & H.O Wills Animals and Birds(PSA uses this one)
• Wills Animals and Birds (TCDB favorite)
• Wills' Animals and Birds
• Wills's Animals and Birds
• Wills's Cigarettes Animals and Birds (Name as displayed on card)
• Wills Cigarettes Animals and Birds (Beckett uses this one)

I think we should use "W.D. & H.O. Wills Animals and Birds" or "Wills Animals and Birds" and put "W.D & H.O. Wills Ltd. " in the Brand Field of the set description.

Think about it this way. W.D. & H.O. Wills Ltd. is the parent company that produces many brands.  Much like Topps Company produces Bowman.  We wouldn't call Bowman, Topps Company.  So why call Wills's, W.D. & H.O. Wills Ltd.   Wills's is the only name on the front and is prominent on the back.

This.

I brought something similar up a few week ago regarding the 1938 W.D. & H.O. Wills - Speed set which has a duplicate listing under Wills - Speed

"while adding one of these Non-Sports Cards to my collection i noticed there are two of the same set listed.  the 1938 W.D. & H.O. Wills - Speed set is complete with all images front and back uploaded.  a duplicate checklist called 1938 Wills Cigarettes Speed is also listed with just a few images uploaded.  not sure if someone can remove the duplicate checklist or Admin has to do that"

Wills's Cigarettes - Speed is probably the preferable name, but in this case it would be better to change the name of the completed checklist and delete the incomplete one.

Bill - There's an IR in for it already. It's in Admin's hands.

For most of their existance Wills was a brand within the Imperial Tobacco Company.

W.D. & H.O. Wills Ltd. produced Goldflake, Capstan, Woodbine, and Star Cigarettes...but all their cards were captioned with "Wills's Cigarettes" or not captioned at all (of course someone will probably find a set that is an exception). They also produced plug and pipe tobacco but I have not seen a set with any mention of specific brands in the title caption. Here's a set advertising their specialty brands. Notice that the title caption is still Wills's Cigarettes.

W.D. & H.O. Wills is the equivelant of Bowman.........Imperial Tobacco Company is the parent company (and the Topps equivelant). Same with the BRANDS Allen & Ginter (not the current Topps branding), Duke & Sons, etc. All were part of the American Tobacco Company. Although to be honest, tobacco issues shoud not be compared to modern cards (IMHO). They were produced and distributed differntly.

Following the "branding logic" the T206 should have 16 different sets listed as their are 16 different brands of that set.

Maybe I'm the only one; but I use the "Brand Field" to sort sets so I don't duplicate sets that are already in the database. As mentioned in a previous post, there have been several sets that have duplicate checklists because they are named differently. 

I also like the: "Wills's Cigarettes Animals and Birds".....it's on the card. In my opinion what's on the card trumps everything.

However, I believe that the brand should be "W.D. & H.O. Wills" as they are/were part of the Imperial Tobacco Company (ITC) or for awhile the British American Tobacco Company (BAT). Other "Brands" of the ITC include John Player & Sons, Lambert & Butler, and Ogden's.

Brand name = W.D. & H.O. Wills

and if we had a place for manufacturer it would be: Imperial Tobacco Comany

Imperial Tobacco Company (ITC) cards are a new interest of mine and to date I've been focusing on John Player & Sons and W.D. & H.O. Wills sets and I haven't given much attention or research to Ogden's or Lambert & Butler issues.

Due to Chuck's comment and Dan's subsequent "thumbs up"  on my brand name ideas, I thought I'd better give my logic a little more thought. It appears that the ITC was pretty consistent with labeling their cards across all of their brands.

"Lambert & Butler's Cigarettes Footballers"  brand "Lambert & Butler"

"Player's Cigarettes National Flags and Arms" brand "John Player & Sons"

"Will's Cigarettes Signalling Series" brand "W.D. & H.O. Wills"

"Ogden's Cigarettes Club Badges" brand "Ogden's"

After a little reflection on Minibbcards and CAD's comments, I really like the set titled with "Will's Cigarettes........", "Ogden's Cigarettes......." etc.

I do feel that the brand field should include the full company name. Maybe it's my OCD or the need to be as complete and accurate as possible (I guess that would be my OCD).

I personally like "John Player & Sons", "W.D. & H.O. Wills", etc. but to be honest, it is more important to me that the "brand field" is labeled and that it is labeled consistently across the database. Here's an example why. This is how the 1888 "Allen & Ginter's The World Champions" set appears in the database:

Notice that the "Brand Field" and the "Set Name" are exactly the same. No big deal except......when you browse by "Brand" this is what you see:

No Allen & Ginter sets appear in the "browse by brand" listing. Again, maybe I'm the only one who uses this functionality. I use it pretty heavily. It helps avoid duplication especially given that we currently use different set naming standards for vintage tobacco cards and that the year of issue for many of these sets is unknown or debatable.

I'm in the process of contacting the dozen or so active members that collect and/or routinely contribute/edit/update vintage tobacco sets. Not all of them are active forum participants. I'm also contacting Admin (with referance to this thread) seeking guidance.

Thanks for the indulgance.