 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 3 4 5 6 7 8  Previous Next
|
|
Senators |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I didn't jump on him, midnit. In every case the As Credited data HAS to be correct BEFORE we can use the Alias system. I am trying to get people to comprehend this, either Tim wasn't paying attention or doesn't careor didn't understand, so I merely tried to expalin it AGAIN. I would expect the Alias to be Alec Guiness or John Gielgud or what have you, but if As Credited is not correct then we have no reliability of an accurate population count for the Alias. Just as Hal is trying to make up an Alias Senator Bill Bradley, whoi is credited with ONE single performance as Senator Bill Bradley and ZERO performances as Bill Bradley, William Bradley what have you. Therefore As Credited and credited are one and the same, there is no provision for hal's fiction.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
|   | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
either Tim wasn't paying attention or doesn't careor didn't understand Tim was paying attention and Tim does care. But Tim does have to confess that he doesn't understand a word of your post...  Once again: if Alec Guinness was really ever credited with "Sir" on-screen (which I'm not even sure about: he certainly isn't in my DVD collection), than it would ONLY belong in the "credited as" field, not in the "name" field. Not only do I feel that is the only sensible way to go, but the "credit lookup" tool results simply don't allow anything else. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
I didn't jump on him, midnit. In every case the As Credited data HAS to be correct BEFORE we can use the Alias system. I am trying to get people to comprehend this, either Tim wasn't paying attention or doesn't careor didn't understand, so I merely tried to expalin it AGAIN. I would expect the Alias to be Alec Guiness or John Gielgud or what have you, but if As Credited is not correct then we have no reliability of an accurate population count for the Alias.Skip We've been directed to use the Invelos lookup counts unless they're proven to be incorrect. Unless you can prove that the counts of Alec Guinness (593) vs. Sir Alec Guinness (0)  are incorrect, you have to choose Alec Guinness as the name. There's just no getting around that. T!M said it should be Alec Guinness (credited as Sir Alec Guinness) and that is correct and is backed up by the Invelos lookup and everything that Ken has directed us to do. | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
| | Registered: August 22, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,807 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting m.cellophane: Quote:
We've been directed to use the Invelos lookup counts unless they're proven to be incorrect. Unless you can prove that the counts of Alec Guinness (593) vs. Sir Alec Guinness (0) are incorrect, you have to choose Alec Guinness as the name. There's just no getting around that.
T!M said it should be Alec Guinness (credited as Sir Alec Guinness) and that is correct and is backed up by the Invelos lookup and everything that Ken has directed us to do. Right. Provided that the counts of Alec Guinness (593) vs. Sir Alec Guinness (0) are not proven incorrect, of course it should be "Alec Guinness (credited as Sir Alec Guinness)". On the other hand, if he was actually credited as "Sir Alec Guinness," the count would change to Sir Alec Guinness (1). | | | | -- Enry |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Absolutely correct, Enry. It pleases me to see that you understand the point. And you don't just jump in with brand new data and make it an Alias, becauwse that effects the population. As Credited MUST be Correct for the alias to work properly. Tow weeks ago I changed I think it was FIFTEEN Robert Downey Jr. to Robert Downey, Jr., that is substantial and there are more yet to be changed in all names. Any o these could EASILY result in an Alias change. So let's get it right, and sto playing around all we are doing right now is pissing into the wind.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
either Tim wasn't paying attention or doesn't careor didn't understand
Tim was paying attention and Tim does care. But Tim does have to confess that he doesn't understand a word of your post... Once again: if Alec Guinness was really ever credited with "Sir" on-screen (which I'm not even sure about: he certainly isn't in my DVD collection), than it would ONLY belong in the "credited as" field, not in the "name" field. Not only do I feel that is the only sensible way to go, but the "credit lookup" tool results simply don't allow anything else. Your comment, tim does demonstrate a complete lack of understanding on your part. I will think about it tonight and see if I can come up with an even easier explanation. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
This is a huge RED HERRING.
These people do not have titles included in fornt of their "names".
Try sticking to the topic at hand! You are correct, but their names do differ from the way they are credited...which is your justification for leaving out the 'title'. If we follow that line of thinking to it's logical conclusion, then we must make the changes I pointed out. Like it or not, your line of thinking has potential consequences...I am simply pointing them out. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar | | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting eaglejd: Quote:
I'm not at home so can't get to my database.
I was just asking because I would think that Senator Bill Bradley should be treated just like Sir Alec Guiness and Sir Laurence Olivier.
The title and first name in the first field.
Senator Bill//Bradley Sir Alec//Guiness Sir Laurence//Olivier. Except that "Sir" is a lifetime honor. Regardless, Sir is not part of his name, therefore, the "credited as" feature should be used. | | | | Hal | | | | Last edited: by hal9g |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:
Quote:
How is he billed. Sir Alec//Guiness.
Certainly NOT!! The correct entry in DVD Profiler would be Alec//Guinness, credited as "Sir Alec Guinness". IMHO, a title is never part of the name, but in this case I can do even better: check the "credit lookup" tool... There you go: 593 entries for Alec Guinness, not even ONE for Sir Alec Guinness. So any contribution having "Sir Alec Guinness" in the name field instead of in the credited as field, will certainly get a no-vote from me. Tim, you would be absolutely correct on two independent counts. One: "Sir" is a title and not part of his name, therefore it does not belong in the "Name" field. It does belong in the "Credited As" field in order that we record the credit EXACTLY as it appears in the credits. Two: Using the look-up tool, he is most commonly credited as "Alec Guiness", therefore Alec Guiness goes in the "Name" field and "Sir Alec Guiness" goes in the "Credited as" field. | | | | Hal | | | | Last edited: by hal9g |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
Quoting hal9g:
Quote:
This is a huge RED HERRING.
These people do not have titles included in fornt of their "names".
Try sticking to the topic at hand!
You are correct, but their names do differ from the way they are credited...which is your justification for leaving out the 'title'. If we follow that line of thinking to it's logical conclusion, then we must make the changes I pointed out.
Like it or not, your line of thinking has potential consequences...I am simply pointing them out. In order for your statement to be true, "name" must be defined as "birth name". There's no such definition in the rules. Hal's stance is that titles are not part of names. His position does not mean that names must now equal birth names as you effectively assert. The rules do not define that titles as part of names nor does it define them as not being part of names. Either position should therefore be valid. But the belief that titles are not part of names does not make the sky fall on birth names and stage names. Titles are essentially a foreign object in a name, much like a possessory credit. Defining titles as non-name-units does not force us to any logical conclusion about any other name form. | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
Quoting hal9g:
Quote:
This is a huge RED HERRING.
These people do not have titles included in fornt of their "names".
Try sticking to the topic at hand!
You are correct, but their names do differ from the way they are credited...which is your justification for leaving out the 'title'. If we follow that line of thinking to it's logical conclusion, then we must make the changes I pointed out.
Like it or not, your line of thinking has potential consequences...I am simply pointing them out. My logic has nothing to do with what his "real" name is (as in the cases you cite). It never has. Go back and re-read what I have said. My argument is simply that "Senator" is not part of his name, therefore, it does not belong in the "Name" Field and you must use the "credited as" field to enter the EXACT credit because his actual credit differs from his name.. | | | | Hal |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | dupe | | | | Hal | | | | Last edited: by hal9g |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
My logic has nothing to do with what his "real" name is (as in the cases you cite). It never has. Go back and re-read what I have said. If that is the case, then, my mistake. Quote:
My argument is simply that "Senator" is not part of his name, therefore, it does not belong in the "Name" Field and you must use the "credited as" field to enter the EXACT credit because his actual credit differs from his name.. It is, however, part of his 'credited name'...something that you acknowledge back on page 3. Since that is the case, Ken has already decided the issue. He said, "The common name is not intended to always reflect the "real name", but the most commonly credited name." From what I have read, Senator Bill Bradley has one credit. If we all agree that his 'credited name' is 'Senator Bill Bradley', and he only has the one credit, based on Ken's comment his common name is 'Senator Bill Bradley'...or am I missing something?  | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar | | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | That is exactly the way I see it Unicus | | | | Pete |
| | Registered: August 22, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,807 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
My argument is simply that "Senator" is not part of his name, therefore, it does not belong in the "Name" Field and you must use the "credited as" field to enter the EXACT credit because his actual credit differs from his name.. But we agreed "Senator" is part of the credited name. And in DVDP the "Name" field is defined as "the most commonly credited name". | | | | -- Enry |
| | Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 1,777 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
Quoting hal9g:
Quote:
My argument is simply that "Senator" is not part of his name, therefore, it does not belong in the "Name" Field and you must use the "credited as" field to enter the EXACT credit because his actual credit differs from his name..
It is, however, part of his 'credited name'...something that you acknowledge back on page 3. Since that is the case, Ken has already decided the issue. He said, "The common name is not intended to always reflect the "real name", but the most commonly credited name."
From what I have read, Senator Bill Bradley has one credit. If we all agree that his 'credited name' is 'Senator Bill Bradley', and he only has the one credit, based on Ken's comment his common name is 'Senator Bill Bradley'...or am I missing something? I see it that way too. In the same vein, Alec Guinness would be the most credited name. Each case is independent based on a total score. | | | | Last edited: by mdnitoil |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 3 4 5 6 7 8 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |