Quoting CharlieM:

Quote:
I would like to have a final decision about this.  I have been contributing them with full descriptions (under the pretense that. it would be easier to remove the extraneous data, than to dig the DVD out to put it in). 

I have been getting comments, that "too much information" basically, and that it wasn't needed.

I will continue the way I am until otherwise told by the "Zombie".....

Charlie

People making such remarks are well, you fill in the blank. I am astounded that anyone would dare to make such a comment, the more information we can provide the clearer and better defined the data is. I will however, give them marks for consistency since they are probably some of the same users who have watered down data in other areas as well.

I agree, Pete, in going through my collection I obviously see a LOT of probable or possible dividers, but with my collection inaccessible for the most part I can't verify these and would not just go blindly adding a divider, I hope that people are ACTUALLY looking at the data and not just making blind guesses. I'll find out eventually and if they are making guesses needless to say i will not be amused and will be making corrections.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
Quoting DarklyNoon:

Quote:
We also leave out "Contains" in the rating descriptions

Donnie

Huh?

I was saying when we enter the rating description from the backcover, we do not enter the word "Contains" that preceeds the actual rating description.
That is why I would suggest to alos leave out the "For", cuz it also only preceeds the actual company.

Donnie

Using group dividers for companies, do we use exactly what is on screen?

Company Name

or

Company Name, Inc.  (on screen credit)

Quoting eaglejd:

Quote:
Using group dividers for companies, do we use exactly what is on screen?

Company Name

or

Company Name, Inc.  (on screen credit)

I would apply the same rules for company names in the divider as we use for company names for the studio fields.

It may make sense to you but it's not AS CREDITED and in Cast/Crew that is the primary Rule. List exactly what you see. We aren't discussing Studios, we are discussing Cast/Crew data

Dividers are part of Cast/Crew, are you being deliberatly obtuse . Let me make it very simple follow the Rules, what maky make sense to YOU is not following the Rules. Ken has passed NO RULING yet on Dividers, last I heard he is still up in the air on exactly how to deal with them, and i am all for as much data as is provided by the film AS CREDITED including the Company Role in the film. That's how i do it here and will do it NO OTHER WAY, as it makes no sense and simply provides meaningless data.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
Dividers are part of Cast/Crew, are you being deliberatly obtuse . Let me make it very simple follow the Rules, what maky make sense to YOU is not following the Rules. Ken has passed NO RULING yet on Dividers, last I heard he is still up in the air on exactly how to deal with them, and i am all for as much data as is provided by the film AS CREDITED including the Company Role in the film. That's how i do it here and will do it NO OTHER WAY, as it makes no sense and simply provides meaningless data.

I see you went into edit mode as I was responding.  Two points:

If "Ken has passed NO RULING, how can I follow the rules? 

How, exactly, does dropping the company suffix make the data meaningless? 

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:

Quote:
You can follow the Rules because it's part of Cast and Crew. The damage tyhat is being done to this database on a daily basis is ridiculous and some of it has been encouraged by you. We have Covers right now for brand new titles, that have been accepted with Watermarks and No votes pointing out said watermarks. If the Screeners won't follow the Rules, then i guess we don't have Rules anymore.

Zombie
Zombie
Zombie

Really?

... watermarked images being accepted is somehow related to Unicus' encouragement.