I wouldn't even want a roman numeral system because it would be just as ill-constructed because it would still depend on the name being a constant. Which it isn't. Common names change constantly around here.

I'm not really interested in the birth year of someone. It's just a crutch but it's the next best thing to a real solution.

I'm not one who's interested that Siddig El Fadil was born in 1965. The only thing I care about is that I see his appearances in Deep Space Nine, 24, Kingdom of Heaven and Syriana when I click on Dr. Bashir in DS9's first season - even though he calls himself Alexander Siddig later on.

And I don't want "Silent Bob" Kevin Smith mixed up with "Ares, God of War" Kevin Smith.

It just seams easier to me to always use a birth year - if available - than to constantly check if I have now two people with the same name every time I buy a new movie.

I would love it for all BY that can be verified be added to the system. The downside is that in the current c&c system, with no distinguishable marks between John Doe and John Doe other than their birth years, the addition of a BY for single entries are more likely to end up confused when another person of that name is added.

My POV on the current system is that by not having a BY for someone, it's easier to notice at a glance that a situation hasn't been dealt with if you find two people who you know are different but are sharing profiles. Otherwise, you could end up with both John Does sharing the same birth year and few noticing because they assume BY existance means it's been through the BY thread which, in my book, is slightly worse than not yet having distinguishing BYs at all.



Quoting DJ Doena:

Quote:
I personally love birth years, the more the merrier.

Me too! Without a birth year, I wouldn't have been born

Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
I have to agree with Staid on this issue. If he hasn't added the BY himself and Invelos have already accepted it (mistakingly or not), why should it be up to him to remove it from profiles he wants to contribute or provide documentation for it?
It's not a change that he himself has made, so why should it be his responsibility? In my opinion what's at fault here is the relatively unchecked way the BYs have been allowed to spread through the system. The checkbox for submitting BYs should apply to all BYs not already in the profile, accepted or not, that way users aren't forced to document changes they haven't made or remove BYs from cast or crew (which could cause problems in their local if they have the other names in their database too).

I could be wrong as I don't have the disc that brought up this topic.... but going by what I read... he did add the birth year to the profile... whether it is already (mistakenly) in the online database for that name is of no difference. as per Rules you can't add a birth year to the profile unless it is needed.

While I agree with you on the way it should work... it don't change the fact that the way the profile was apparently contributed is against the current rules... so does deserve the no votes it got.


As for whether the rule should be changed to allow all birth years... at this point I have no opinion.  I would have to see both sides of that argument to make my decision.

Quoting Staid S Barr:

Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
I could be wrong as I don't have the disc that brought up this topic.... but going by what I read... he did add the birth year to the profile... whether it is already (mistakenly) in the online database for that name is of no difference. as per Rules you can't add a birth year to the profile unless it is needed.

No, I did not enter the BY, and when I uploaded the profile no checkbox appeared.

What happened is that there was a BY attached to an actor in the db that was not in the list for the online.  Staid didn't notice it, because there was no checkbox (meaning it had already been accepted).  It may be a perfectly valid, needed BY.  Or it may not.  I don't know.  But I see this phenomenon regularly in my own contributions.

If you submitted a profile (note I am saying profile not the online database) that adds a birth year where there wasn't one in the profile before your contribute... then you added the birth year to the profile... so then per rules it has to be needed to distinguish between 2 same name actors.

Whether it is needed or not has to be checked... and then documented that it is needed (see the huge indexed birth year thread). In my eyes whether it is not needed or needed but not documented to show me it is needed still deserves a no vote either way. But in no way ignoring it (and not looking into it) would be the right answer... personally or per the rules.

I understand what you are saying... I am sure we all have added birth years to profiles without realizing it... so not adding any notes for it. But if a voter sees it and questions it with a no vote... then yes it is up to the contributor to either...

1. Document it's need
2. Resubmit without the birth year
3. Let the no vote stand

But per Rules... if you are adding a birth year to a profile it must be to distinguish between 2 like name people.

So yes... I do believe these no votes are justified.

You can easily know...

While Contributing:
Look at the cast list before submitting... it WILL highlight the change in the cast list... I have seen it when I contribute.

After Contributing:
If you get a no vote about one... simply go to the contribution notes for that profile... go to your contribution... and click the "Evaluate this contribution" link... then you can look at the comparison and see the difference in the cast list (it will be highlighted).

So was the birth year new to the profile? (Not necessarily new to the database... but to the profile?)

If so then it brings us back to...

Quote:

if a voter sees it and questions it with a no vote... then yes it is up to the contributor to either...

1. Document it's need
2. Resubmit without the birth year
3. Let the no vote stand

But per Rules... if you are adding a birth year to a profile it must be to distinguish between 2 like name people.