The more things change, the more they stay the same. 

Quoting W0m6at:

Quote:
Even if we do find an solution to the argument over what constitutes a first and last name, the fact that we are anglicising names means that I have cast and crew in my database that won't link because some are anglacised using soft sounds (e.g. G and B) whilst others use hard sounds (e.g. K and P respectively).  Then there's the good old "oo" versus "u".

I would hazard that most of us on these boards aren't able to anglacise names ourselves (can't read the characters in the first place), so are relying on third-party sources where subtitles haven't done it for us (and in these cases it still comes down to someone's preference, rather than something definitive).  "Foreign" (whatever that may be to a particular user) names will always present an issue, as will the conversion to another (appropriate for DVDP) form.  Renaming of the fields would reduce the number of problems by one, and is a move I fully support.

That is a constant problem, all of the Chinese dialects use the same characters but they are pronounced in different ways (it's not a phonetic alphabet) so depending on where the parser comes from will determine how it would be anglacised. He or Ho for example neither will be wrong.

What we use as a common name is pretty unimportant it need not be a name at all. All that has to do is link all the various profiles but the only way to know what it says on the screen is to enter it that way. I still think the first name = given name because that's the way we do things is bordering on xenophobia. A high percentage of Chinese actors names are technically nicknames anyway. To parse them could mean we end up with Rock The

I think someone said they would like to be able to sort by family name? That again is only of use in the West and very short sighted. There are only around 3000 Chinese surnames 5 of them make up nearly 400 Million people (comfortably over the population of the US). The vast majority in South Korea share 5 surnames! (Until recently they could not marry one another if they had the same family name) Most of the Seikh world have one of 2 names.

Quoting W0m6at:

Quote:
Even if we do find an solution to the argument over what constitutes a first and last name, the fact that we are anglicising names means that I have cast and crew in my database that won't link because some are anglacised using soft sounds (e.g. G and B) whilst others use hard sounds (e.g. K and P respectively).  Then there's the good old "oo" versus "u".

I think this could be covered by "credited as" as long as you were aware of the different variations in the names! Although the same is true for Western actors: you have to know that John Smith and Jon Smith are the same person before you can link them.
In this situation if you're aware that a person's name has been angliscised in a different way, you can use credit lookup to decide which one to use as common name, and use "credited as" to show the alternative, should you wish to.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
North:

I think you are making far too much about nothing.

Skip

If it is 'much ado about nothing', why does it keep coming up...over...and over...and over again?  The answer is simple...because there are people out there that don't think the same way you do.

For the record, I don't collect Asian DVDs so I don't have a dog in this fight, but I am not so blind as to believe there isn't a problem that needs to be fixed.  Words have meaning and the words 'first', 'middle' and 'last' have specific meaning when it comes to names.  Absent a rule telling them otherwise, people are going to go by those meanings.

Until this is addressed, either by a program change or a rule change, this issue will continue to come up.

Quoting EnryWiki:

Quote:
Quoting TheFly:

Quote:
So now we have to enter her as Mai//Nakahara. Oh my god, whatever shall we do?!?!!

It's very simple: enter the last name in the "last name" field, and so on. What is "last name"? It's a synonym for "family name". Who says so? Wikipedia (I've just quoted it in this thread), dictionaries, anyone you ask outside of this forum .

Just act like 99% of cases here in forums, disagree with Skip and 99% of users with common sence agrees with you. I still do think we need those fields renamed in the program.

By Skip's logic we would have:

Van/Damme/Jean-Claude
First Name/Middle Name /Last Name
WTF???

My name is Bond/James/Bond   

Quoting Kulju:

Quote:
Quoting EnryWiki:

Quote:
Quoting TheFly:

Quote:
So now we have to enter her as Mai//Nakahara. Oh my god, whatever shall we do?!?!!

It's very simple: enter the last name in the "last name" field, and so on. What is "last name"? It's a synonym for "family name". Who says so? Wikipedia (I've just quoted it in this thread), dictionaries, anyone you ask outside of this forum .

Just act like 99% of cases here in forums, disagree with Skip and 99% of users with common sence agrees with you. I still do think we need those fields renamed in the program.

By Skip's logic we would have:

Van/Damme/Jean-Claude
First Name/Middle Name /Last Name
WTF???

My name is Bond/James/Bond   

Bad argument.  The thing is that most of these names are credited as FAMILY NAME/GIVEN NAME(S) on screen.  If there was a film in which JCVD was credited as Van Damme Jean-Claude, then your example would work.  The fact is that most Asian films (in which the credits have western alphabets used) use the Family Name/Given Name format (i.e. Chow Yun-Fat, Lau Ching-Wan).

Quoting Kulju:

Quote:
The question is:
Does the First Name / Last Name in the program mean
#1.Given Name/Family Name
or
#2.Left Name on the screen/Right Name on the screen?

That is the question rules doesn't give as an answer. If we had only one field, "name", answer would be simple by the rules.

I certainly think it would solve a lot of problems if we simply had a confirmation in the rules that #2 was the way to go.
It would be a lot easier to implement, as I would guess that's how most of the names have been done anyway, and a lot easier for new users to understand and use.
And we would still be able to correctly parse Helena//Bonham Carter as, although there are two words, Bonham Carter is only one name. Similarly with Chow//Yun Fat (Yun-Fat).
Just a quick clarification in the rules that first/middle/last simply refers to the order on screen reading left to right would mean we could put an end to all this debating and get on with linking all the roles and profiles.

Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
I certainly think it would solve a lot of problems if we simply had a confirmation in the rules that #2 was the way to go.
It would be a lot easier to implement, as I would guess that's how most of the names have been done anyway, and a lot easier for new users to understand and use.
And we would still be able to correctly parse Helena//Bonham Carter as, although there are two words, Bonham Carter is only one name. Similarly with Chow//Yun Fat (Yun-Fat).
Just a quick clarification in the rules that first/middle/last simply refers to the order on screen reading left to right would mean we could put an end to all this debating and get on with linking all the roles and profiles.

On the surface, that sounds good, but in practice it won't work.  If the rules are clarified so that first/middle/last simply refers to the order on screen, reading left to right, you can't have 'Helena/ /Bonham Carter'.

Under that type of rule, which we attempted to write, it would be parsed 'Helena/Bonham/Carter' as that is the order, on screen, reading from left to right.

The first thing that must be decided is, are we entering 'names' or are we entering 'data'?  If we are entering names, then they should be entered as names...with a default standard.