I would do it like this season one - season two - season three

hmm this is a conundrum actually this is one of these titles that one should have a compromise and call it 24: seasons one to three.

The reason I suggested the slash was because that's what's used when we have multiple film titles in the DVD title. I think you had one like that recently - an Alec Guinness boxset that was a list of all the films inside?

Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
The reason I suggested the slash was because that's what's used when we have multiple film titles in the DVD title. I think you had one like that recently - an Alec Guinness boxset that was a list of all the films inside?

Following your advice, I resubmitted as
24: Season One / Season Two / Season Three: Collector's DVD Boxset.

Immediately after that, someone submitted the very same profile as
24: Season One: Season Two: Season Three: Collector's DVD Boxset
saying that's the right way to do it per the Rules.

Actually the Title rule does say
Episode descriptors are part of the title; separate them with a colon and space; e.g. "Star Trek III: The Search for Spock". For multiple descriptors, use a colon and space for each break.

BUT, one could argue, is a list of seasons really "multiple descriptors", or rather a list of items in a same descriptor?
Think of the double/multiple feature DVDs, where we list all the films separated by a slash, as northbloke said.
It seems to me that in this case the Rule is not very clear, to say the least, and there is space for different interpretations. 
In my view, it should be something like
[Cover Title: Descriptor1: Descriptor2...: Season(s) Indicator: Edition]
with Cover Title = Film1 / Film2 / .... in case of a list of movies in the same DVDs, and Season(s) Indicator = Season 1 / Season 2 / ... in case of a list of Seasons.

However, let the Screeners decide.

As a side note, I would be glad if there was more cooperation and helping attitude between fellow users. After the first No vote, a few days ago, I PMed the original No voter asking for some explanation in order to maybe correct my contribution, but didn't receive any reply nor explanation as to why he thouht I used the "wrong" format. So I spent some time asking on this Forum for ideas and suggestions (BTW, nobody came out with the "colon", probably because there is no such clear rule that applies to this specific situation), and still no advice from the No voter.
Instead, when I resubmitted the profile, a very prompt reaction and counter-contribution, eventually saying what he thinks the Rule is!

I am not saying anyone *must* reply to a request of explanation if he doesn't feel like it, but I am saying that that would be much appreciated, help save time and make everything easier!

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
The salsh wouild not be correct, all you have to do Enry, is look around at some other titles, specifically in this set.

Thanks for expressing your point of view.

Would you use the slash in a list of films in double/triple/multiple feature DVDs, anyway?

Hmmm: I mjissed the actual breakdown on the first pass. I think what you are describing is closer to a set of films which would be dealt with by / spearator. I completely missed the multi-season aspect <slaps self> (bad Skip). So I would agree with the way you presented it based on tha premise, Enry.

Skip

I see problems with these "complete series" sets if the discs are merely a combination of all the individual seasons.  Is there some way we could have both the newer "complete series" box data AND the "individual season" boxes?  I would hate to lose the child profiles for the "Disk 1" of a season because someone else has used that DiscID to identify that entire Season.  This has happened already (or will if a contribution is accepted) for Alias: Season 5: Disc 1 (as Dvdjon pointed out earlier).

In most cases, the "complete series set" came out after the individual season sets - so if we go by the way we've always done things in Profiler, we shouldn't overwrite the original data with the "reissue" data, which is what the "complete series" represents.

[Can anyone explain to me what I just said?  As I read it, I'm more confused than ever. ]

Quoting EnryWiki:

Quote:
Would you use the slash in a list of films in double/triple/multiple feature DVDs, anyway?

That's why I suggested using the slash. The use of the colon suggests that Seasons 2 and 3 are subtitles of Season 1, not separate seasons.

@kdh, I understood too - and you're quite right. The disc ID should cover whatever was released first, which will almost always be the child profile for the individual season.

Quoting kdh1949:

Quote:
I see problems with these "complete series" sets if the discs are merely a combination of all the individual seasons.  Is there some way we could have both the newer "complete series" box data AND the "individual season" boxes?  I would hate to lose the child profiles for the "Disk 1" of a season because someone else has used that DiscID to identify that entire Season.  This has happened already (or will if a contribution is accepted) for Alias: Season 5: Disc 1 (as Dvdjon pointed out earlier).

In most cases, the "complete series set" came out after the individual season sets - so if we go by the way we've always done things in Profiler, we shouldn't overwrite the original data with the "reissue" data, which is what the "complete series" represents.

[Can anyone explain to me what I just said?  As I read it, I'm more confused than ever. ]

I understand what you say, and it's similar to the conundrum I am in with the 24:1-3 box set!
For instance, I can't add Other Features to the main profile because it has to be treated as a box set and features should belong to child profiles (season-level). On the other hand, I can't contribute that data for season-level profiles, because they have no individual UPC and their Disc IDs are already used for disc-level child profiles, and I agree with you it would be a problem overwriting them! So I am at a loss.