| Author |
Message |
| Registered: December 27, 2009 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 5,131 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting scotthm: Quote:
Quoting ateo357:
Quote:
the funniest is to see a user not contributing in the thread to jump in to take a shot a someone else who jumped in.
I know you're not talking to me as mine was the sixth post contributed. 
--------------- Sorry I missed the 6th post. And yes I was. everytime 51 posts, people fell the need to take shots, then it turns into a pissing contest. |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting ateo357: Quote:
Quoting Lewis_Prothero:
Quote:
Quoting ateo357:
Quote:
It goes in as credited as, so they do show up in the CLT.
Ehem,
No it doesn't.
Uncredited entries (when correctly flagged as such) are not counting for the CLT.
statement was made to a previous statement.
"But since the rules tells us that honorifics do not go into the name field... that is all that is needed to prove the CLT wrong... which is all we need to do per Ken's clarification!"
take a statement out of context. ahem. Sorry, but the OP was referring to an uncredited appearance, so I thought you were too. BTW: Reread your post (and the previous) twice and still didn't find any hint on which I could have guessed that in fact you weren't . Your clarification from sometime later made it clear though. Thanks for pointing the problem out. | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 |
|
| Registered: December 27, 2009 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,131 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Lewis_Prothero: Quote:
Quoting ateo357:
Quote:
Quoting Lewis_Prothero:
Quote:
Quoting ateo357:
Quote:
It goes in as credited as, so they do show up in the CLT.
Ehem,
No it doesn't.
Uncredited entries (when correctly flagged as such) are not counting for the CLT.
statement was made to a previous statement.
"But since the rules tells us that honorifics do not go into the name field... that is all that is needed to prove the CLT wrong... which is all we need to do per Ken's clarification!"
take a statement out of context. ahem.
Sorry,
but the OP was referring to an uncredited appearance, so I thought you were too.
BTW: Reread your post (and the previous) twice and still didn't find any hint on which I could have guessed that in fact you weren't .
Your clarification from sometime later made it clear though.
Thanks for pointing the problem out. I know I don't really explain things out, it seemed pretty clear in my head thou, it just doesn't come out that way. A-Hem back at me. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Did you see this? (question I put in bold)... Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
Quoting ateo357:
Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:
Quote:
That is a known issue.... if you look at the linked thread you will see it was not only brought up there... but also that I brought it up in the thread when Ken was first going to change the rule. But it was basically ignored when I brought it up when the rule was written... and accepted as something that had to be once the rule was written. And has been happening every since then (2010).
so you see my issue with linking profiles for a person who isn't credited in the film. But I have a Fake common name in my local.
Obviously I see the issue... as I said in the very first post I would prefer to see the rule revert back to what it used to be (honorifics as part of the name not using Credited As for them).
But until such time that happens (if ever)... what else do we do that is more per rules then this? because if there is a way that is more per rules then what we said I would like to know so I can use it. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: December 27, 2009 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,131 |
| | Posted: | | | | all I can say is, it is an uncredited role. Is it really that important to you? If so then have at it. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Yes it is... it is for a cast member I am familiar with... and I would want the name to link with all the profiles I have with him. I definitely want any cast members I am familiar with to link whether they are credited or uncredited. why wouldn't I? | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: December 27, 2009 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,131 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
Yes it is... it is for a cast member I am familiar with... and I would want the name to link with all the profiles I have with him. I definitely want any cast members I am familiar with to link whether they are credited or uncredited. why wouldn't I? He's must be one of those uncredited nuggets that Skip always talked about. 1 credited role in Jaws, 2 uncredited roles. I feel the same way about Don Turner of China Dolls. I'm starting to get sarcastic, so I think I'll give the forums a rest. | | | | Last edited: by ateo357 |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | And your point is? yes he is in 3 titles (I need to check the 1 of the uncredited appearances to see if imdb is right)... but I own them all... And I know him from 2... very distinctive look... so why is it that I wouldn't want the profiles to link just like any other cast member that I know from more then 1 title? Whether it is 200 or 2 appearances they should link in the database. Whether credited or uncredited. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: December 27, 2009 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,131 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
And your point is? yes he is in 3 titles (I need to check the 1 of the uncredited appearances to see if imdb is right)... but I own them all... And I know him from 2... very distinctive look... so why is it that I wouldn't want the profiles to link just like any other cast member that I know from more then 1 title? Whether it is 200 or 2 appearances they should link in the database. Whether credited or uncredited. my point is it will link in your database, but if all of the Jaws credits are entered correctly, you will not find a credit for him in the CLT. If someone has only Airplane and sees him uncredited and checks CLT to see what other movies he's in it will be blank. There is nothing linking him to Jaws or his other uncredited role. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | It will link in my database as well as anyone else that has both movies in their collection. I am sure that I am not the only one that has more then one for him... both Jaws and Airplane is very popular films. As 2 other people have said... these have been done like this for 3 years now. It isn't something new. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: December 27, 2009 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,131 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote:
It will link in my database as well as anyone else that has both movies in their collection. I am sure that I am not the only one that has more then one for him... both Jaws and Airplane is very popular films. As 2 other people have said... these have been done like this for 3 years now. It isn't something new. between the two of us you are. Never really enjoyed Airplane. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | That is all fine and good... but doesn't mean the name shouldn't link for everyone that has (or gets) both movies... just like any other name in the database. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: May 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,475 |
| | Posted: | | | | There is a LOT that I contribute that I never look at again. If someone wants to add something and is following the rules, why shouldn't that data be added? |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 3,197 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting ateo357: Quote:
Future.
Have a new actor that uses Robert Niven in film C. shows as only Robert Niven in CLT. There is no need for a BY because he is the only one in CLT. But now I have 2 Robert Nivens in my local.
Need to do away with the honorific rule and list them as credited, with no credited as. Yes theoretically that could happen but there are so many more important issues to fix with the database that this doesn't even register. If we had proper name linking based on unique IDs instead of the unreliable combinations of ever changing common names and birthyears then that would take care of this little problem too. That's really the only thing that can fix most of our linking problems so I think it's a lost cause to try and support a broken system by introducing more crutches. But yeah, when we get there we can do away with credited as completely since the names should link no matter how you write them. But for now, I see no reason to change it. | | | | First registered: February 15, 2002 |
|