I have recently seen more contributions than before with people "trusting blindly in the CLT", meaning making changes for e.g. actors that have the same name but are not the same person, but still share entries in their list. Also the fact that the DB might be corrupt is ignored. It is well known that the db still has a lot of Imdb data.

I have discussed this before and some listen, but others just keep their contribution hoping it will be accepted.
And what bothers me the most is the apparent ignorance of the yes voters who don't think for a minute that the contribution might be incorrect.

I refuse to accept a change to a profile if I can't be 100% sure that the contribution is correct or at least that the proper research has been made. How hard is it to make a common name thread?

Sometimes I just get the feeling that people just don't care, but only want to make "their" contributions seen. Or people seem to think they are right in what they do.
It's not about "being right", it's about doing a good job to keep the DB flawless!

Quoting MikaLove:

Quote:
I have recently seen more contributions than before with people "trusting blindly in the CLT", meaning making changes for e.g. actors that have the same name but are not the same person, but still share entries in their list. Also the fact that the DB might be corrupt is ignored. It is well known that the db still has a lot of Imdb data.

I have discussed this before and some listen, but others just keep their contribution hoping it will be accepted.
And what bothers me the most is the apparent ignorance of the yes voters who don't think for a minute that the contribution might be incorrect.

I refuse to accept a change to a profile if I can't be 100% sure that the contribution is correct or at least that the proper research has been made. How hard is it to make a common name thread?

Sometimes I just get the feeling that people just don't care, but only want to make "their" contributions seen. Or people seem to think they are right in what they do.
It's not about "being right", it's about doing a good job to keep the DB flawless!

While I understand your frustration, people who use nothing but the CLT are not doing anything wrong...at least as far as Invelos is concerned.  Those people who want to dig deeper are, of course, free to do so, but nobody has to do that and, since they are working for free, you really can't expect them to.

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
The Martian is right. Per Invelos... checking the CLT is all you have to do.

Thankfully this may not be an issue with the next update to the program.

Hopefully. 

I'm not voting no just because I "feel like it" or think the contribution might be wrong. I just use my common sense and like with most things in life I question the possibilities of correctness.

OK. "All you need to do is check the CLT", and that's fine. But what about those who are prepared to go that extra mile and really want the DB to be flawless and correct?
You're saying it's better to be lazy than to work hard?
Do we want to be convenient or efficient?

When I see a name change, I check the CLT. Thoroughly. If I see something suspicious, I let the contributor know – that it's not OK to change just anything, just because that person "thinks the CLT is God", or something. The CLT can be proven wrong in oh so many cases, and it has.

If you are about to change a name to what you think is the common name, because "that's what the CLT says", then be prepared to be "investigated".

Either we strive for a flawless DB or anything goes. Anarchy!

I mean, come on. We all know the DB is loaded with junk from Imdb!

Either way it's the one who has done more research that has the power, rather than only having looked at the CLT. In some cases, the CLT doesn't count for anything. Just that there's indeed an error.

What will the next update provide us with?

And surfeur51, I have no clue of what you are talking about. Since I mean that doing the research is to base your contributions from findings in the movies themselves. Looking at the cast and crew lists and enter them exactly as they are. A lot of especially older contributions didn't start that way, but they were based on copy/paste from Imdb and then spread like a plague from there on.

The CLT is right when the contributions are. And a contribution is right when the data that is provided can be backed up. Not just "but the CLT says so". The CLT isn't The Source.

In THIS THREAD Ken talks about updating the cast and crew sections... new linking and stuff...

Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:


We will not be throwing the baby out with the bath water.  Any replacement system must support the base functionality of the current system, and must maintain the linking work that has already been put into our database.  Ideally any replacement system will also improve upon the current system:

- Eliminate the birth year in the online database
- Eliminate the CLT as a name determination tool
- Allow entry of properly accented and formatted names
- Require no changes to existing profiles when an actor changes names (e.g actress gets married)

Please keep this conversation on topic and civil so we can leave it in the general contribution discussion forum and get the widest feedback possible.  Moderation in this thread will be strict.

Notice what I put in bold.  So hopefully this won't be a concern too much longer.

It sounds like to me you are trying to be more demanding on the users then Invelos is... as Ken did say going by the CLT is all we HAVE to do. He also said if we can document that the CLT is wrong we can go with what we found to be correct.  But it must be documented... such as the name threads we see. From there we can point to the thread to show people that use the CLT for that name that is has been documented as wrong.

Is this the way I would have done it if I was Invelos... no... most likely not. But it is the way we have to do it until a change is made. Which hopefully is on the way.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting MikaLove:

Quote:
OK. "All you need to do is check the CLT", and that's fine. But what about those who are prepared to go that extra mile and really want the DB to be flawless and correct?

As I said, those people are free to go that extra mile.

Quote:
You're saying it's better to be lazy than to work hard?

Nope, I am saying that people are not required to do more than Ken requires.

Quote:
Do we want to be convenient or efficient?

When I see a name change, I check the CLT. Thoroughly. If I see something suspicious, I let the contributor know – that it's not OK to change just anything, just because that person "thinks the CLT is God", or something. The CLT can be proven wrong in oh so many cases, and it has.

If you are about to change a name to what you think is the common name, because "that's what the CLT says", then be prepared to be "investigated".

Feel free to investigate all you want.  If you can prove the CLT numbers are wrong, that information should be considered by the screeners.

Well. What can I say? I'm a perfectionist. Sometimes I too make mistakes and that I don't deny. But aren't we all here to correct each other's mistakes?
Either way, before I vote yes or no on a contribution I naturally look through it carefully. If something looks probably incorrect after my research, I either vote no, or in rare cases "neutral". But that is mostly when the title is only in my wishlist and I can't check myself.
So, yes, my demands are very high. But they should be that. Always.

Quoting MikaLove:

Quote:
Well. What can I say? I'm a perfectionist. Sometimes I too make mistakes and that I don't deny. But aren't we all here to correct each other's mistakes?
Either way, before I vote yes or no on a contribution I naturally look through it carefully. If something looks probably incorrect after my research, I either vote no, or in rare cases "neutral". But that is mostly when the title is only in my wishlist and I can't check myself.
So, yes, my demands are very high. But they should be that. Always.

You can be a perfectionist and as demanding as you want, but only on your own database.  When it comes to the main database, you can only be as demanding as the rules allow. 

When I first started out with this software, I was very meticulous with cast and crew listings: trying to first enter following standard rules, then changing what I locally wanted (correctly spelled name, correct linking, correct romanization for Japanese names, etc).

Taking a step back now, I see the various flaws with the current system. This is certainly not me trying to be negative but just coming to the realization that each system has its flaws and limits.

Recent serious lack of time also hindered me from contributing much and now I take a more laid back approach: still meticulous about my Japanese actor/crew profiles but for all the rest, I just go with the flow, almost blindly updating profiles from the online DB. I just don't have the time and energy to personally recheck and reverify every name change, BY or common name anymore.

For the time being, I accept the system the way it is, flaws and all; keeping in mind that Invelos is working on a better way to handle these things. Once that update is available, I'll probably regain more motivation to submit and hopefully the online will be a much better starting point that before

That being said, I understand it's not easy to build such a DB and as such I understand the reasons why the current DB is the way it is and very much appreciate all the work put in by Invelos and contributors

All this to say that I understand Mika's point, but I believe the implementation of the new system Invelos is working on will be the definitive answer. We as users can try to be meticulous or try to patch things up from our side, but I believe the a  thorough and lasting solution should and will come from Invelos