I need to ask a clarifying question, because normally I don't get too in depth with niche contributions, however lately I am noticing some interesting things come up, and would like to correct them. I will list the chain of events, and I need you gurus to make sure my logic is sound...


1. I download a profile update for a title I own, the contribution notes show a change to the overview, on my update screen (using Profile Comparison Plus Plug-In) it shows the noted change to the overview, and a change in birth year for an actor, it states in my existing profile the birth year is 1940, but in the new file there is no birth year listed.

2. I accept all changes for this profile (I am aware that this will not remove the birth year)

3. I then go back to the profile and contribute to the master database

4. The contribution web page comes up and shows a change in cast for this actor to change their birth year to 1940, but there is no check box at the bottom stating that it has not been accepted.


Does this mean that the birth year for this actor is accepted into the database, but has not been updated in this profile, and therefore needs propagation?

If yes do I need to include sources, or can I simply state "propagating previously accepted birth year"?

Am I completely wrong? If so, Explain.


the only other thing I should add to this is that I had at one point installed the Headshot Master Database that was full of erroneous and un-needed birth years, however I did spend hours cleaning that mess up and believe I am 100% clean of erroneous birth years.

JP -

I am not afraid of running into trouble... i'm just looking for a clarification, i'd rather learn here then 1000 no votes, some of the titles that this is showing up in are A-List R1 titles.

So I just verify that it is the right person and go... Do I need full documentation like if it was a brand new addition or can I simply state Propagating existing birth year?

If the check box isn't there, it should be enough to mention that you are simply propagating it. That's why that system is there, so that the same person doesn't have to documented over and over again.

It does make sense, Paul! ...I just repeated what I remembered having read elsewhere and have seen practiced by others before.

Agreeably it is a little risky and the contributor and voters must pay extra attention to those.

thanks - i've got my questions answered, i will spot check to ensure it is the correct actor and propagate with basic documentation.


***let the flood begin as i am now bored and sitting at my computer....

Quoting Behemot:

Quote:
There still are, however, some birth years that have been incorrectly added to the online database, where only 1 cast/crew member with that name exists. In this case the birth year should not be propagated, as the rules clearly say only to use/add birth years when necessary to distinguish between same-name cast/crew members.

Yes, those still exist. But IIRC the check box system was introduced later, so trying to propagate them would require you to tick the ckeck box and provide full documentation. Since the check boxes are in place the documentation is being looked at more closely, I believe.

EDIT:
Not sure it's what prompted Behemot to his comment, but Scott Rudin seems to be one of those with accepted yet unnecessary BY...

Quoting MtnMike:

Quote:
My question is....if I'm voting on a contribution that is 'propagating and established BY", how do I verify that the BY was previously fully documented - especially if I've only one entry with that person's name in my db?

And if I've only one entry in my db, why would I ever want to accept a BY update? And for what it's worth, in a case of a valid pair of persons who happen to have the same name, do BOTH of these people have to have a BY?

Because you never know when you're going to acquire a DVD that adds the other one.  With the BYs in place, you'll have them differentiated as soon as you add the new actor.