 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 ...6  Previous Next
|
|
Uncredited: Close match? |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 105 |
| | Posted: | | | | Can't be a problem: DVD was released in Feb 2007. Can't see who did submitted this (no uploading since 1300 GMT). |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,759 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rifter: Quote:
Yes, it does matter. If the stuff is undocumented, AND is a close match -- both conditions of which are true in this case -- it can be removed, per the rules, correct or not. Correct! One small detail though: it is not per the rules but according to two statements from Ken in the forum. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
It's amazing, John, how these people see things, they will allow Rules to be blatantly broken, they are willing to impose their will on everyone to suit their convenience, and they are willing allow data to remain that was clearly illegal to begin with and undocumented. not to mention how little they comprehend of Db design. Their logic while understandable is completely illogical.
Skip Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.............. | | | | Hal |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting richierich: Quote:
There is no onus on you to do this Enry, but I agree with my UK friend that it would be of great service to all other users if you did a quick check of the actors being removed, as some of the data could be accurate and valuable to other users.
cheers
Rich Well stated. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Very simple answer, Enry. The data was never properly documented and slipped past the screeners. The data should be removed or docyumented.
Skip It may be a simple answer, but it is also YOUR answer. Ken's answer was a tad different. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rifter: Quote:
Quoting Bodi:
Quote:
The other question is...is the data correct? If it's correct then it doesn't matter if it matches IMDB. So if you can't verify that there is something incorrrect about the data, I would leave it alone.
Yes, it does matter. If the stuff is undocumented, AND is a close match -- both conditions of which are true in this case -- it can be removed, per the rules, correct or not. You are correct, it 'can be removed'. That is, however, quite different than 'should be removed. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Posts: 445 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rifter: Quote:
Quoting Bodi:
Quote:
The other question is...is the data correct? If it's correct then it doesn't matter if it matches IMDB. So if you can't verify that there is something incorrrect about the data, I would leave it alone.
Yes, it does matter. If the stuff is undocumented, AND is a close match -- both conditions of which are true in this case -- it can be removed, per the rules, correct or not. The point I'm trying to make is that if I know the data is correct I won't remove it just because it matches the IMDB and it is undocumented. By the same token I won't remove data if I am not convinced that it is incorrect even tho it matches IMDB and is undocumented. I would at least try to make an attempt at verifying it so I don't look like an ass by removing correct data. That was my advice to to the original poster and someone else gave him the same advice and he seems to agree. You're milage may vary Rifter. Let me also add this. If someone was to remove this data and one voter or maybe even more voters started voting 'no' because they actually did some research or knew some or all of this data to be correct, they would be perfectly within their right to vote 'no'. I am also quite convinced that this sort of submission would be declined if it could be documented that the data is correct. I have actually witnessed this myself so just saying the data is undocumented and matches IMDB may not be enough to get it removed. | | | | Last edited: by Bodi |
| | Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Posts: 445 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
It's amazing, John, how these people see things, they will allow Rules to be blatantly broken, they are willing to impose their will on everyone to suit their convenience, and they are willing allow data to remain that was clearly illegal to begin with and undocumented. not to mention how little they comprehend of Db design. Their logic while understandable is completely illogical.
Skip I used to think you knew a lot about database design until a couple of days ago when the quotes around title rule came into effect. Apperently somebody smarter than you who knows more about database design decided that the quotes are not needed. This person apperently feels that a database should be user friendly...something you have yet to figure out. Every time you post now it makes me think of that and I smirk and create a mental picture of all the egg on your face from that whole affair.  |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,694 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Bodi: Quote:
Quoting Rifter:
Quote:
Quoting Bodi:
Quote:
The other question is...is the data correct? If it's correct then it doesn't matter if it matches IMDB. So if you can't verify that there is something incorrrect about the data, I would leave it alone.
Yes, it does matter. If the stuff is undocumented, AND is a close match -- both conditions of which are true in this case -- it can be removed, per the rules, correct or not.
The point I'm trying to make is that if I know the data is correct I won't remove it just because it matches the IMDB and it is undocumented. By the same token I won't remove data if I am not convinced that it is incorrect even tho it matches IMDB and is undocumented. I would at least try to make an attempt at verifying it so I don't look like an ass by removing correct data. That was my advice to to the original poster and someone else gave him the same advice and he seems to agree. You're milage may vary Rifter.
Let me also add this. If someone was to remove this data and one voter or maybe even more voters started voting 'no' because they actually did some research or knew some or all of this data to be correct, they would be perfectly within their right to vote 'no'. I am also quite convinced that this sort of submission would be declined if it could be documented that the data is correct. I have actually witnessed this myself so just saying the data is undocumented and matches IMDB may not be enough to get it removed. No, they wouldn't be right to vote NO. If the rules say undocumented data can be removed, and data that is close to verbatim on IMDB can be removed, then to vote no is clearly a violation of the rules. Voting NO against a legal procedure is demonstrably a violation of the rules, and everybody knows that. | | | John
"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again! |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,029 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Bodi: Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
...Db design....
I used to think you knew a lot about database design... To be fair, that is completely your fault.  While skipnet50 uses this word a lot, none of his posts indicate that he knows something about it - I'm not even sure, if he knows what the word itself means. | | | | Matthias |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rifter: Quote:
No, they wouldn't be right to vote NO. If the rules say undocumented data can be removed, and data that is close to verbatim on IMDB can be removed, then to vote no is clearly a violation of the rules. Voting NO against a legal procedure is demonstrably a violation of the rules, and everybody knows that. Except the rules don't say any of that. Ken made a statement to clarify 'when' it was o.k. to remove uncredited cast. He made no mention of how people should vote in those cases. Since removal is not required, people can vote whichever way they wish...just like they can on image quality...and let the screeners decide the outcome. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
| | Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Posts: 445 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rifter: Quote:
Quoting Bodi:
Quote:
Quoting Rifter:
Quote:
Quoting Bodi:
Quote:
The other question is...is the data correct? If it's correct then it doesn't matter if it matches IMDB. So if you can't verify that there is something incorrrect about the data, I would leave it alone.
Yes, it does matter. If the stuff is undocumented, AND is a close match -- both conditions of which are true in this case -- it can be removed, per the rules, correct or not.
The point I'm trying to make is that if I know the data is correct I won't remove it just because it matches the IMDB and it is undocumented. By the same token I won't remove data if I am not convinced that it is incorrect even tho it matches IMDB and is undocumented. I would at least try to make an attempt at verifying it so I don't look like an ass by removing correct data. That was my advice to to the original poster and someone else gave him the same advice and he seems to agree. You're milage may vary Rifter.
Let me also add this. If someone was to remove this data and one voter or maybe even more voters started voting 'no' because they actually did some research or knew some or all of this data to be correct, they would be perfectly within their right to vote 'no'. I am also quite convinced that this sort of submission would be declined if it could be documented that the data is correct. I have actually witnessed this myself so just saying the data is undocumented and matches IMDB may not be enough to get it removed.
No, they wouldn't be right to vote NO. Yes they would and if the evidence was convincing enough such a contribution would be declined I'm sure. |
| | Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Posts: 445 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
Quoting Rifter:
Quote:
No, they wouldn't be right to vote NO. If the rules say undocumented data can be removed, and data that is close to verbatim on IMDB can be removed, then to vote no is clearly a violation of the rules. Voting NO against a legal procedure is demonstrably a violation of the rules, and everybody knows that.
Except the rules don't say any of that. Ken made a statement to clarify 'when' it was o.k. to remove uncredited cast. He made no mention of how people should vote in those cases. Since removal is not required, people can vote whichever way they wish...just like they can on image quality...and let the screeners decide the outcome. Bingo!! |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 105 |
| | Posted: | | | | These are the two Italian entries in DVDP 2.5 & 3.0. Also the UK (3) and IMDB data (4). I personally would hate to lose this valuable data. Maybe it's a good idea to add them to all the R1 versions of this movie (US & Canada). There are 10 such items but none of them has these valuable data. Italian? Yes, key is of course "italian version of db entry" in the UK version. Although declined by the Screeners. But Screeners do strange things now and then.
1. Il Diavolo veste Prada (UPC 010312-068126), entered on February 26 (source: DVDP 2.5)
Ilona Alexandra as Celebrity on Red Carpet (uncredited)
Andrea Bertola as Red Carpet Celebrity (uncredited)
Alexander Blaise as French Bellhop (uncredited)
Jaclynn Tiffany Brown as (uncredited)
Carl Burrows as Businessman (uncredited)
Molyneau DuBelle as Parisian Luncheon Guest (uncredited)
Guy A. Fortt as Security (uncredited)
Scott Hatfield as New York Mirror Reporter (uncredited)
Nina Lisandrello as Super Clacker (uncredited)
Zev McAllister as Runway Editor (uncredited)
Denis McKeown as Guest - Black & white Ball (uncredited)
Justin Restivo as French Waiter (uncredited)
Sage Salzer as (uncredited)
Emily Sandberg as Superclacker (uncredited)
Robert Stio as Photographer (uncredited)
Taylor Treadwell as New Assistant (uncredited)
2. Il Diavolo veste Prada: 8-010312-068126 (approved on March 20) (Source DVDP 3.1.1)
Ilona Alexandra as Celebrity on Red Carpet (Uncredited)
Andrea Bertola as Red Carpet Celebrity (Uncredited)
Alexander Blaise as French Bellhop (Uncredited)
Jaclynn Tiffany Brown
Carl Burrows as Businessman (Uncredited)
Molyneau DuBelle as Parisian Luncheon Guest (Uncredited)
Guy A. Fortt as Security (Uncredited)
Scott Hatfield as New York Mirror Reporter (Uncredited)
Nina Lisandrello as Super Clacker (Uncredited)
Zev McAllister as Runway Editor (Uncredited)
Denis McKeown as Guest - Black & white Ball (Uncredited)
Justin Restivo as French Waiter (Uncredited)
Sage Salzer
Emily Sandberg as Superclacker (Uncredited)
Robert Stio as Photographer (Uncredited)
Taylor Treadwell as New Assistant (Uncredited)
3. The Devil Wears Prada (UK) 5-039036-029643 (Submission by someone noting: "italian version of db entry" and declined by Screeners)
Ilona Alexandra as Celebrity on Red Carpet (uncredited)
Andrea Bertola as Red Carpet Celebrity (uncredited)
Alexander Blaise as French Bellhop (uncredited)
Jaclynn Tiffany Brown as (uncredited)
Carl Burrows as Businessman (uncredited)
Molyneau DuBelle as Parisian Luncheon Guest (uncredited)
Guy A. Fortt as Security (uncredited)
Scott Hatfield as New York Mirror Reporter (uncredited)
Nina Lisandrello as Super Clacker (uncredited)
Zev McAllister as Runway Editor (uncredited)
Denis McKeown as Guest - Black & white Ball (uncredited)
Justin Restivo as French Waiter (uncredited)
Sage Salzer as (uncredited)
Emily Sandberg as Superclacker (uncredited)
Robert Stio as Photographer (uncredited)
Taylor Treadwell as New Assistant (uncredited)
4. IMDB data of The Devil Wears Prada
Ilona Alexandra ... Celebrity on Red Carpet (uncredited)
Andrea Bertola ... Red Carpet Celebrity (uncredited)
Alexander Blaise ... French Bellhop (uncredited)
Jaclynn Tiffany Brown ... (uncredited)
Carl Burrows ... Businessman (uncredited)
Molyneau DuBelle ... Parisian Luncheon Guest (uncredited)
Guy A. Fortt ... Security (uncredited)
L.J. Ganser ... Marty (uncredited)
Alexie Gilmore ... Clacker (uncredited)
Scott Hatfield ... New York Mirror Reporter (uncredited)
Tim Krueger ... Fund Raiser (uncredited)
Nina Lisandrello ... Super Clacker (uncredited)
Zev McAllister ... Runway Editor (uncredited)
Denis McKeown ... Guest - Black-and-white Ball (uncredited)
Justin Restivo ... French Waiter (uncredited)
Sage Salzer ... (uncredited)
Emily Sandberg ... Superclacker (uncredited)
Robert Stio ... Photographer (uncredited)
Taylor Treadwell ... New Assistant (uncredited) |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | It's of no value if it is NOT documented. Looks to me like some users need to learn to follow the Rules.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Hey, I have an idea. Why don't those who think it so valuable and that because it got into the databse under false pretenses, get to work and document the data. I could make a list of users to work on this project and if you split it up among you, it wouldn't take long to get it done. For some of you that would actually represent of REAL Contribution for the rest of us.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 ...6 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |