I started writing a comment in an attempt to clarify a jumble of different notations but it rapidly grew overlong. I'll do my best to untangle things a bit, at least.
There's several parameterizations in various places in the literature.
I wanted to use $\theta$ to represent what rnbinom calls size (to match Venables and Ripley and simplify my discussion), but you're using $\theta$ for something else so that's out. Let's call it $\kappa$.
The parameterization used in rnbinom has the density as:
$$f(x;p,\kappa)=\frac{\Gamma(x+\kappa)}{\Gamma(\kappa)\, x!}\, p^\kappa\, (1-p)^x,\: x=0,1,2,...,\: 0<p\leq 1,\,\kappa>0$$
In the documentation of rnbinom, $\kappa$ is called size (n when they write the density). In the Wikipedia page on the negative binomial, it's called $r$ (it uses the same definition up to simply using a different symbol for that parameter).
The parameterization used in MASS (the book and the package that comes with R) is
in terms of $\mu= \kappa (1-p)/p$ and $\kappa$ [1] (though they use $\theta$ where I have $\kappa$).:
$$f(x;\mu,\kappa)=\frac{\Gamma(y+\kappa)}{\Gamma(\kappa)\, y!}\, \frac{\kappa^\kappa \mu^y}{(\mu+\kappa)^{y+\kappa}},\: y=0,1,2,...,\: \mu,\kappa>0$$
The (excellent) book by Dunn and Smyth uses a different parameterization again ($\mu$ and $\psi=1/\kappa$).
This $\kappa$ (aka size, $r$) is indeed sometimes called a dispersion parameter by some authors, though it's not a dispersion in the sense of the exponential dispersion family; with fixed $\kappa$ I believe that the GLM's dispersion parameter is $1$.
It is, however, related to the sense in which a negative binomial model might be called overdispersed relative to the Poisson, in that $\kappa\to \infty$ would correspond to the limiting Poisson case and any positive value of $\kappa$ would be overdispersed, with smaller $\kappa$ being overdispersed to a greater extent; since the variance is $\mu+\mu^2/\kappa$.
If you want to have a more natural "overdispersion" parameter, Dunn and Smyth's [2] parameterization in terms of $\psi=1/\kappa$ makes more sense (larger $\psi$ means $Var(Y)/E(Y)$ increases, though the excess is related to $\mu$).
So now we come to the question of what does your $\theta$ represent?
Note that m/size in rnbinom or $\mu/\kappa$ is $\theta-1$ in your question, which in Wikipedia's parameterization is $\frac{1-p}{p} = \frac{1}{p} - 1$. So your $\theta$ appears to be $1/p$ (per both Wikipedia and rnbinom).
Where that parameterization (in terms of your $\theta=p^{-1}$) comes from, I cannot say, unfortunately. Where did you see it?
[1]: Venables and Ripley, (2002), Modern Applied Statistics with S (4th ed) [Sec 7.4]
[2]: Dunn and Smyth, (2018), Generalized Linear Models With Examples in R [Sec 10.5.2]
(Note to self: I should dig out the book by de Jong and Heller and check their parameterization, but if memory serves I think it used essentially the same form as MASS does.)
m/(theta-1)there. I am asking specifically about the equationm/(theta-1). Not necessarily abouttheta. – Mark Miller Oct 08 '22 at 06:20m/(theta-1), how did you come up with it? What isthetain your case? – frank Oct 08 '22 at 06:22