Quoting EnryWiki:

Quote:
I, for one, was in favor of what Skip intended to do. I know there are concerns and warnings, but I think we should choose the lesser evil.  Especially when the source is an accurate transcription work from the film's credits, like I think of Skip's. Yes, I know there are a few instances where the credits are somewhat different in R1 and R2 releases, but those few differences can be corrected afterwards, and in most cases that kind of contribution would be better than an empty profile or than an inaccurate "IMDb" profile, anyway.

If you do it really carefully, it might work. On the other side there are some aspects which you should take care of:

- One or several profiles which you would contribute might already have a credit list which is better than what you contribute at least in some detail. Maybe it has the correct and documented "Helena//Bonham Carter" parsing while yours use "Helena/Bonham/Carter" because you believe that Bonham is her middle name and haven't heard otherwise yet.

- The actor list that you overwrite may have some uncredited entries. You have to document and reason every removal of uncredited entries.

- The actor list may have some role names from "other" sources because the films credit has no role names. The role names on those profiles may be different than yours. I don't think you should overwrite them when they are not wrong but only different.

- During contribution you may learn that the credit list, which you have contributed, still have some error (getting a no vote). Now you have to correct your contribution of course not only in your locality but for every profile that you are contributing, specially those profiles where this error did not exist in the first place and where you would introduce that error with your running contribution.

- There are probably more complications which can occur. You would definitely have to watch every of  your contribution carefully until they are accepted (or declined). "Fire and forget" your credits into every profile should not be done.

Maybe it would be better to correct only a specific name entry in all the profiles (instead of changing the complete credit list). This would help to improve the credit lookup tool the same way. Couldn't we use goodguy's Name Variants plugin for this purpose?

And of course some of the profiles which you might want to update, would be better removed completely from the database because they are legacy profiles typically in the wrong locality. Remeber that Ken has imported a lot profiles from the Intervocative database.

Quoting RHo:

Quote:
Quoting EnryWiki:

Quote:
I, for one, was in favor of what Skip intended to do. I know there are concerns and warnings, but I think we should choose the lesser evil.  Especially when the source is an accurate transcription work from the film's credits, like I think of Skip's. Yes, I know there are a few instances where the credits are somewhat different in R1 and R2 releases, but those few differences can be corrected afterwards, and in most cases that kind of contribution would be better than an empty profile or than an inaccurate "IMDb" profile, anyway.

If you do it really carefully, it might work. On the other side there are some aspects which you should take care of:

- One or several profiles which you would contribute might already have a credit list which is better than what you contribute at least in some detail. Maybe it has the correct and documented "Helena//Bonham Carter" parsing while yours use "Helena/Bonham/Carter" because you believe that Bonham is her middle name and haven't heard otherwise yet.

- The actor list that you overwrite may have some uncredited entries. You have to document and reason every removal of uncredited entries.

- The actor list may have some role names from "other" sources because the films credit has no role names. The role names on those profiles may be different than yours. I don't think you should overwrite them when they are not wrong but only different.

- During contribution you may learn that the credit list, which you have contributed, still have some error (getting a no vote). Now you have to correct your contribution of course not only in your locality but for every profile that you are contributing, specially those profiles where this error did not exist in the first place and where you would introduce that error with your running contribution.

- There are probably more complications which can occur. You would definitely have to watch every of  your contribution carefully until they are accepted (or declined). "Fire and forget" your credits into every profile should not be done.

Maybe it would be better to correct only a specific name entry in all the profiles (instead of changing the complete credit list). This would help to improve the credit lookup tool the same way. Couldn't we use goodguy's Name Variants plugin for this purpose?

And of course some of the profiles which you might want to update, would be better removed completely from the database because they are legacy profiles typically in the wrong locality. Remeber that Ken has imported a lot profiles from the Intervocative database.

Rho:

Give me a little credit, I am far smarter than you would appear to believe. relative to your comment about HBC, there is a very big difference between a well known actor/actress, crew person and some name you look at and say who the heck are you? This i where the problem comes in with assumptions, as i have said hundreds of times.

I will re-open this on a limited basis and see how it progresses. Just as before, I will use my audited data as a basis, and will carefully review all necessary notes, dates of release and any other data which may be pertinent. Should you stumble on one of these and discover that there REALLY is a difference between your areas On screen data and the data which I have provided I want to hear about it.

Skip

while i was doing the Michael Hopkins (NZ) <> Mike Hopkins (UK) i've done only "Michael Hopkins" and corrected along the way where was necessary Ethan Van der Ryn as they where in the same screenshot. I had handfull of no votes, changed the notes to clearify even more what i was doing and PM back even more when needed. The adaption only happend in the all the LOTR dvd's and 'Heavenly Creatures' all the other I could not do as i don't have those movies. And there is still a lot to verify on those credits for both men. Also came a light there is more then one Peter Jackson, this also has not been followed up due to lack of interest. So a big task is ahead of us.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
Quoting RHo:

Quote:
If you do it really carefully, it might work. On the other side there are some aspects which you should take care of:

- One or several profiles which you would contribute might already have a credit list which is better than what you contribute at least in some detail. Maybe it has the correct and documented "Helena//Bonham Carter" parsing while yours use "Helena/Bonham/Carter" because you believe that Bonham is her middle name and haven't heard otherwise yet.

- The actor list that you overwrite may have some uncredited entries. You have to document and reason every removal of uncredited entries.

- The actor list may have some role names from "other" sources because the films credit has no role names. The role names on those profiles may be different than yours. I don't think you should overwrite them when they are not wrong but only different.

- During contribution you may learn that the credit list, which you have contributed, still have some error (getting a no vote). Now you have to correct your contribution of course not only in your locality but for every profile that you are contributing, specially those profiles where this error did not exist in the first place and where you would introduce that error with your running contribution.

- There are probably more complications which can occur. You would definitely have to watch every of  your contribution carefully until they are accepted (or declined). "Fire and forget" your credits into every profile should not be done.

Maybe it would be better to correct only a specific name entry in all the profiles (instead of changing the complete credit list). This would help to improve the credit lookup tool the same way. Couldn't we use goodguy's Name Variants plugin for this purpose?

And of course some of the profiles which you might want to update, would be better removed completely from the database because they are legacy profiles typically in the wrong locality. Remeber that Ken has imported a lot profiles from the Intervocative database.

Rho:

Give me a little credit, I am far smarter than you would appear to believe. relative to your comment about HBC, there is a very big difference between a well known actor/actress, crew person and some name you look at and say who the heck are you? This i where the problem comes in with assumptions, as i have said hundreds of times.

I will re-open this on a limited basis and see how it progresses. Just as before, I will use my audited data as a basis, and will carefully review all necessary notes, dates of release and any other data which may be pertinent. Should you stumble on one of these and discover that there REALLY is a difference between your areas On screen data and the data which I have provided I want to hear about it.

Skip

I have not been talking about your previous mass contributions in any way. I have pointed out some pitfalls which might occur when some more users might decide to try this out. I am sure that you have met some of those problems. I have seen for example that you have dealt with the uncredited problem. I have pointed out some other problems like role names, parsing etc. Other grey areas of the rules (e.g. how to exactly use dividers) I have not even spoken about. "Helena/Bonham/Carter" is an example I have given because it is now widely known and accepted. But there have been times when there have not been such a wide consensus about this specific name. I have not mentioned this name because I think that you might not be able to parse this credit correctly. How do you come to that assumption?

Quoting Giga Wizard:

Quote:
Voting groups is a definitieve NONO. The yes votes comes automaticly with the proof you provide in the contribution note. You follow up on the no votes and PM those with the answer to their no.

Glad to hear.

Quote:
Also to consider. If you doing by names only, you have to revisite every profile many times. The LOTR have to be done all over again, you would not believe in what state some of those profiles are in.

I know.

Quote:
Some of those are practical empty and did not even got any vote in responce.

Maybe some of those should have been deleted (wrong locality, wrong UPC etc.).

Quote:
I did 131 bad profiles where Michael Hopkins was wrongly credited. A lot of work go's in to the research of the person. researching the CLT data, mostly you get crashed out of the forum when applying for a search. even the support of some regular forum users is missing.

All of this work is voluntary. Nobody is forced to do it and nobody has to join and give support.