I had the PM conversation with Ninehours after removing the episode divider with [and Introducing]. He though i should have just replaced it with an Group divider.

Quoting The Rules:

Quote:
"Cast", "In order of appearance" or other similar headers at the start of the credits should not be entered."

As Ninehours correctly states, the rules mention at the start of the credits. However, i don't see the need for this info. Also, if i recall correctly, the movie we talk about now, and several older movies i recently audited, also have a [with], [also starring] or other headers as well. Do we really want to add these? I don't.

I also know several Hong Kong films using several of these 'headers' in the opening credits for example [ Special Appearance], [Introducing] (sometimes for actors already having several movies made, so no extra info there either).

As i said, i don't think this really adds anything and i'm not sure if the rules really mean don't enter unless they are somewhere in the cast list.

What if the cast started with the introduction followed by some names, than an Also starring. According to the way some people read the rules we'd only add the Also starring, but not the introduction.

Now i'm not totally against adding these type of headers although, as noted before, i don't see the use for it, but either always or never.

Paul

is the the credits at the start of the film?

how do they appear in the end credits?

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting CharlieM:

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
I, on the other hand, would.  First, it is what the credits say.  Second, it is good information as it indicates that this was their first ever role.

Not as a group divider.  A group divider will associate the role "And introducing"

If you were going to do it, I say it is a cast division and would use an Episode Divider.

I personally wouldn't, to me the information is not relevant

Charlie

It is a group of actors under a singe header.  Sounds like a group divider to me.  The fact that it will associate 'And Introducing' with the role isn't relevant...at least in my opinion.

I mentioned to Ken before about the appearance for on where (in that case) most the cast would be indented and how the role would look... his reply was that an end divider directly under the group divider would solve both those problems. I am thinking that may be a good idea for something like this here as well...

Quoting Ken Cole

Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
That would really look terrible Ken... then the majority of the cast would be indented in the cast list... and.. we would have the majority of the cast when clicking on a name look like..

In Alphabetical Order: Role Name

I for one would hate to see this!

An easy solution to this is to insert a group end divider directly after the group start divider.  The cast list is then not indented, and the credit listing in the credit info window shows only the role.

I'm going to agree with Martian on this one, while the majority may not like it I see nothing in the rules that forbid it. "And Introducing" is a logical grouping and fits in the format of an example given ("Additional Cast") in the rules, so whether I was happy with it or not, I couldn't vote "no" to it.

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:

An easy solution to this is to insert a group end divider directly after the group start divider.

I have been against this in the other thread and am still against it here. An end divider directly after a start divider means an empty group and should be avoided like the plague.

Ken never specified locally. I understood him to mean at all... including online. Would definitely be nice if we could get a clarification on it though.

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
I would. I'd refer to this poll and vote "no". While this "I can see the other side of the coin as well" stance is really nice, all that it results in is an inconsistent mess in the database: some profiles will have this, others won't. If something like this was accepted into one of my profiles, that would mean I'd have to put it in myself just to be able to submit any further cast additions or corrections, and then remove it again locally. I'm a fairly simple guy: either we do something, or we don't. Here we've got a pretty strong majority of users not wanting this, so I say: let's not do it, then.

Slight correction, what we have here is a pretty strong majority of forum users, not users...not that it really matters as a poll does not a rule make.  The fact that you might have to accept this into one of your profiles, in order to contribute further cast changes, is not relevant to the discussion.  The only thing that is relevant is whether or not the rules allow it.

Definitely not.