Nearly all the Busby Berkeley films do not have quotes, but two do:





Somehow, I'm expected to remember that these two films (only) out of the Busby Berkeley collection will need to have the quote marks on them before I can find either in my database...

But will I? the DVD cover does not have the quote marks... which will rule the common database?

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
You guys act as if you've never heard of Sort Title, or the full string search filter.

I use the sort title, but why must we destroy an entire section of the database, requiring those of us who love old films to rebuild every title before we can use them?

So, I should submit 42nd Street as • 42nd Street • ?

I completely sympathise with you Cliff,
you'd think being able to work out the title of a film was pretty easy, but not according to some users on here. They seem to think that the data held is more important than the use it's there for!
I hope you've voted no.

Getting back to your original post, yeah you need to lock everything down.  Once I reached the conclusion that the rules actually encourage this kind of crap data, I went through and locked every field possible.  It's a hassle when checking through updates, but now I'm immune to this kind of sillyness.

That's okay, we've got a guy trying to suggest that the original title to "Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer" is really "4: Rise of the Silver Surfer", because it uses the Fantastic Four symbol in the credits and the only way to literally translate that symbol is with a number. 

Locks are your friend.

Quoting mdnitoil:

Quote:
It's a hassle when checking through updates, but now I'm immune to this kind of sillyness.

How is it a hassle? Just lock every DVD using the "Entire DVD" lock, and then, when looking through updates, use the partial accept function. No need to unlock anything.

Quoting mdnitoil:

Quote:
Perhaps "hassle" was the wrong word.  Previously, I just accepted whatever changes came down, trusting in the congnitive powers of my fellow profilers.  You're right, in that now I invoke the partial accept, but it forces me to go over every individual change being submitted.  Not that it's a bad thing, but it's far more time consuming.  So, instead of "hassle" let's just say it's more tedious.  Still, I'd rather do that then blindly get some of this bogus junk that slides through.

Ahhh. Put like that, yes. When you said hassle, I thought you meant that you still had to unlock whatever field you wanted to update and then accept the update. Sorry about that.

I simply don't understand this ongoing spit and fuss. The Onlkine database is not intended to be a reference database designed to meet every users requirements, that would be absolutely impossible. It is a starting point from which we all construct our database locally to meet our individual proclivities. As all the ongoing arguments PROVE there is also no such thing as accurate, accuracy, like beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and depends entirely upon what yardstick one wishes to use for HIS qaccuracy versus the one utilized by the Online.

Nearly every one of the arguments that comes up revolves around the above precept. Let's take an example, the yardstick that Profiler is the Cast data as it is listed in the end credits INCLUDING the roles, this particular list can be listed in any one of many forms by the filmmakers, but that is our yardstick, some want it to be in other forms that is more palatable to THEM. That is the express perview of the LOCAL database. One of the most common issues that come up today is Sort Title, we used to have users trying to twist the database to their needs on a weekly basis, for example User A wants ALL his James Bonds to appear together, so he Contributes  his sort title, and saets up James Bond 04 as a sort title INSTEAD of Thunderball, so now it meets his needs and next week User B changes it to something else. This went on weekly, we had one title that was edited over 900 times in the first FIVE years...ONE title.       . Ken finally publicly said that Sort=Title Period, did that stop the nonsense...absolutely NOT. So, eventually Ken said "I ( not me) will handle the Online Sort,from now on Sort Title is your business".

Skip