Quote:
Skip, let me see if I understand your position.  I'll set up a hypothetical situation:  A casting director spots you and decides you're perfect for the extra he needs.  You play the part of an extra in the film, we'll say "guy at newsstand."  After it is finished filming, the film is rushed off to have the credits done by a guy typing at a computer.  He mistypes and instead of the credit reading  "Guy at Newsstand = Skip" it reads "Guy at Newsstand = Skop"  Nobody spots the mistake and it gets through to the finished product.  Oops.

If this hypothetical movie then came out on DVD you would say that the credit should read:
"Guy at Newsstand = Skop" rather than "Guy at Newsstand = Skip [Skop]"

I may be misunderstanding your position here, however. 

What I believe is wanted in the case of Francois is to credit, say François Truffaut (a well-known French director) as François Truffaut [Francois Truffaut].  That's not making anything up.  It is simply saying that if Truffaut is credited with his first name spelled wrong, it should be entered in the [credited as] field rather than the main field.

Quote:

The repetitive threads are another matter entirely...
Skip

Quote:
Taro:

It iis user imaginatiion when that users data disagrees with the Credited data. The credited data is factual data, anything else is imagination, supposition or hallucination. You are not understanding that our data source is the film credits and ONLY the film credits. And that we list that data as credited, not as imagined.

I think that you need to follow the Rules, You mention correct data as defined by whom you or surfeur, no thanks. We have defined CORRECT data and it is based on FACT not FICTION, if you follow the Rules you and al users will discover that the CLT would actually function as it should. Since the CLT is to be the most commonly credited name and that credited name comes from the factual data instead of some users addled brain.

Furthermore moving backwards to uer-interpreted data doesnot make the database better. Ther are plebtyn of errors in IMDb and it functions as you want it to, you are free to interpret the data just as much as you want, as I have said before that might be better for some users who believe in user-hallucinated data, after all you can track 10,000 titles for FREE over there. I want a databse that is accurate to the REAL data and a linking system that actually works correctly. Instead of trying to create another version of IMDb or reinventing their wheel, just go use it.

Skip

Quote:
I absolutely agree with you Unicus, and that's the point.

Every thread that discusses any sort of naming convention, Skip is the one screaming loudest and belittling the most how all the data has to come from the DVD because of the rules this and the rules that. But, technically, he himself is not following the rules when he submits data from his "notebook". That is not what the rules state. Yet the moment someone wants to have any sort of discussion about how names are handled, he comes Skip swopping down to save the day with his capitalizations and rule book exclaiming any data outside of the DVD is bad data.

Putting names of people in the database on a pre-release is common sense (whether Skip will agree to it or not), and I support it. Just like release date and genre. But you can't scream at people for wanting to discuss a rule change, or an alternative solution to an obvious problem, but not follow the rules yourself (again, technically).

Forget_the_Rest, I completely agree with you, as well. Yet even with the rest of the rules quoted, I don't see "memory" listed there.

I dare someone to submit something that Skip owns and use a "notebook" as a source. Yeah. That would fly. 

Quote:
For example. all right we know the Asian Name problem exists (Native name), does it do any good to bring up and dance around about it every few weeks. There is eve a sticky thread that was created expressly for that purpose, but still it gets a new thread opened every few weeks and has for 3 years. I submit that it does no good to bring it up every few weeks, it does heighten tension in the forums.

Quote:
And yet you think that I am the problem for wanting to discuss the issue...?

Quote:
Between my wife and I, we have  built some of the largest, most secure and most accurate databases in the United States, this was not achieved by allowing the people who do the data entry to just put whatever they want into a given field.

Quote:
Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
Between my wife and I, we have  built some of the largest, most secure and most accurate databases in the United States, this was not achieved by allowing the people who do the data entry to just put whatever they want into a given field.

Since you always bring this up, can I ask if you could share with us what these databases are and what you mean by term "built"? Have you designed and coded the database structure, queries etc., or have you entered data to db designed and coded by someone else, like we do as DVDP users?

Don't get me wrong but your written text doesn't actually give an impression about person who know a lot about database design.

I have really difficult time to believe that "some of the largest, most secure and most accurate databases in the United States" was built by two persons. Where can I find the list of the most secure, largest and accurate dbs in the US?