| Author |
Message |
| Registered: May 8, 2007 |  Posts: 270 |
| | Posted: | | | | This film was added to InterVocative on Feb 16 2006. In all the contribution notes there is nothing documenting any source for any actors credited or uncredited. Here is the link to the film at InterVocative. Take a look and tell me what justification there is to keep any actors that are not in the film credits.
http://www.intervocative.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=178775&PageNum=LAST
Now since there was no source or documentation for adding the uncredited, I am submitting the changes to the cast and crew taken from the film credits and in order.
The ney sayers say I should justify removing the uncredited, I am saying that the uncredited were not justified or documented when added. Again go to the above link and look.
Whoever votes NO on this is voting to make our online database currupt.
Use a little common sense.
8ballMax-----"Obviously not an IMDb clone of uncredited. Prove they don't belong before removing."
I have proved that they were not added correctly.
hal9g-----"Please stop removing uncredited actors just becuase you don;t like them!"
I am not removing them because I don't like them. I am removing them because they were not properly added and don't belong in the credits.
RHFactor-----"Removes previously approved data with no source."
I have a source, the contribution note from InterVocative, showing that there was not any documentation for adding any cast and crew. | | | Jim
More than I need, but not as many as I want! |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | I understand where you are coming from but the current suituation from Ken is to only remove uncredited actors if it's a match for IMDb. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 519 |
| | Posted: | | | | ^^ What he said. | | | | Stuart |
|
| Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 270 |
| | Posted: | | | | Well then Ken should weigh in on this. | | | Jim
More than I need, but not as many as I want! |
|
| Registered: March 10, 2007 | | Posts: 4,282 |
| | Posted: | | | | Uncredited should only be removed where they are a match with a third party database. Note that they do not have to be an exact match. If they are a close match with any third party database, and there is no listed justification, it's safe to remove them. | | | | Invelos Software, Inc. Representative |
|
| Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 270 |
| | Posted: | | | | Thank you very much. | | | Jim
More than I need, but not as many as I want! |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 813 |
| |
| Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 270 |
| | Posted: | | | | But I have proved that they should not have been in there in the first place. | | | Jim
More than I need, but not as many as I want! |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 906 |
| | Posted: | | | | Yes, but that's only one of the conditions... They also have to match a third party DB (I have no idea if they do in this case) | | | 
The colour of her eyes, were the colour of insanity |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 813 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting eaglejd: Quote:
But I have proved that they should not have been in there in the first place. If they should not have been there in the first place then they would not have been accepted. Once they have been then you have to follow the rules and document their removal. | | | Andy 
"Credited as" Names Database |
|
| Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 270 |
| | Posted: | | | | What are you smokin? There are alot of thing in the whole data base that should not have been accepted. | | | Jim
More than I need, but not as many as I want! |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | The proper question to ask is what has he been drinking...  |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | I have one profile I updated recently where there were 10 people who were a match with IMDb with one person in DVDP that wasn't in IMDb and one person in IMDb that wasn't in DVDP. I didn't remove them previously even though there was no documentation on them because it wasn't an exact match. However, now Ken has weighed in and stated that it only needs to be a close match to justify removal, I think I'll have them removed. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Ken Cole: Quote:
Uncredited should only be removed where they are a match with a third party database. Note that they do not have to be an exact match. If they are a close match with any third party database, and there is no listed justification, it's safe to remove them. Oh, now that's interesting. A not so subtle change in the criteria here. In a previous posting, you said they had to be a "carbon copy". A "close match" opens the door for all kinds of interpretation (and arguments)!  | | | | Hal |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,917 |
| | Posted: | | | | I came to the same conclusion Hal after posting my last comment in this thread. I'm not going to remove those uncredited items in a new submission unless I edit the profile for something else. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 951 |
| | Posted: | | | | Ken also said we are not required to remove them in his earlier post. Quoting Ken Cole: Quote:
If you believe the uncredited entries are a carbon copy of a third party source, and the existing contribution note history doesn't supply a source, you may remove them, but are not required to do so. I would add before you go on a crusade of wholesale removal of Uncredited entries that you believe come from a third party source. You might want to take the time to verify if they are actually in the movie. If they are, all you may need to do is update the role to match more closely to those of the credited cast. | | | Are you local?
This is a local shop the strangers you would bring would not understand us, our customs, our local ways. |
|