Quote:
Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:
We are speaking of "standards" for entering data in a database with sorting, filtering and linking functions (I think there are better words for that, I was just answering to a user who used this one..).
Believe me, when the result changes with time for the same object, we can say that the "standard" is not appropriate for those functions...

On this we agree, which is why I don't bother with the CLT or common names.  When I audit a title, I go strictly 'as credited' with one to one conversions to mixed case.

The problem is, no rule change is going to solve the name linking issue.  Let's take your first suggestion, always use the maiden name.

Actress does 3 films as Joan Smith, then gets married and does 47 films as Joan Sampson.

Films 1, 2 & 3 get entered as Joan Smith.
Films 4 - 10 get entered as Joan Smith because people know they are the same person.
Films 11 - 40 get entered as both Joan Smith and Joan Sampson because a mix of old and new users are entering them and the new users don't know they are the same person
Films 41 - 50 get entered as Joan Sampson because new users don't know who Joan Smith is and the old users have moved on.

While that's overly simplified, it is a situation that can, and probably will occur.  It will happen with any standard...changing or arbitrary.  I just don't see how changing the standard makes anything better.  The only thing that will fix this is a program change to a unique identifier.

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
The only thing that will fix this is a program change to a unique identifier.

OK, so in some monthes, years, or never, we have a program change with a unique identifier. So in your example, Joan Smith will be identified by the program as Ft24587. You will still have to know that Joan Sampson is the same person and link her to Ft24587.

Is it easier to link Joan Sampson to FT24587 than to Joan Smith ? I do not think so. Joan Smith is just the "unique identifier", I mean the common name defined by specific rules, and not by a changing CLT. With half a dozen of specific rules (for married people, for middle names, for Asian or accented names, for fake BY...), you solve tomorrow 99% of common names threads, and the job necessary to link the future "unique identifier", that will have to be done, will be already available...

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
... people have already done the work, under the current system, to get names to link.

Not at all. Not 10% of common names threads have found the result, and some have been opened several years ago. With a common name defined by specific rules, everything will be clear tomorrow, including thousands of not yet opened common name threads (thousands of names have non linking variants in CLT)

Quote:

You can't go far wrong if you contribute actors names "exactly as they are in the credits", making the exception that "if the credit information is entirely capitalized, use standard capitalization rules instead."  (And capitalization rules have been clarified to avoid the need for interpretation as to how to convert uppercase to lower case letters.)

There is no requirement for knowing "real names" or using the CLT to make contributions of cast or crew, and in fact if every contribution had followed this rule then the CLT would be in pretty good shape.

Quote:
Is it easier to link Joan Sampson to FT24587 than to Joan Smith ? I do not think so.

Quote:
Quoting surfeur51:

Quote:
Is it easier to link Joan Sampson to FT24587 than to Joan Smith ? I do not think so.

but it is. you have change one (1) profil for FT24587 after she has married again. the result is, that all profiles get this update and no more discuss for any common name.

Quote:
....446 are conclusive and that is 83.5205992509363% that have found the result (success rate). 

Quote:
At a local level, this is very achievable and easy to do (assuming the interest/passion is there) you simply designate cast/crew with the same name as (I), (II), etc.

Quote:
Quoting Scooter1836:

Quote:
....446 are conclusive and that is 83.5205992509363% that have found the result (success rate). 

As you have exact statistics, can you precise how many names among those 446 have CLT results matching with common name thread conclusions? That is what I call "result".