Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting VirusPil:

Quote:
I've not checked all names, but I think for example "Nicholas Cage" changed his name to this, so it's now actually his name and not just a stage name.

For example "The Rock" is a stage name as his actual name is Dwayne Johnson.

So I think there is a difference and that's why handle it different.

His real name is Nicolas Coppola, as in the son of Frank Coppola.

That was his Birth name. Someone told me that in the USA you can change your name nearly to all what you want and how often you want.
According to these:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000115/bio
http://www.virginmedia.com/homefamily/genealogy/nicolascage.php
He changed his name, so his actual name is Cage.
A stage name is a name that is just use on/for stage. In law the normal name is what matters.

And I now see your links... ignore the above. 

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
As far as I'm concerned, the fact that it is a stage name takes precedence, and therefore, it all goes in the first name field.

I can't agree with this.  If we treat this name as a stage name, and enter it all into the first name field, then we have to do that with every single stage name regardless of how it looks.  That means 'John Wayne/ / '...'Tom Cruise/ / '...'Nicholas Cage/ / '...'Brad Pitt/ / '...is that what we really want?  I sure don't. 

I have to agree with Martian on this.

I personally think if a stage name looks like it could be a real name it should be parsed as a real name.

Strongly agree with this. Our "modus operandi" should accommodate the average DVDP user - you know, the one that DOESN'T frequent these forums. If without any further knowledge a stage name looks like it could be a real name, it should be parsed as such. It should not be a requirement to do research on what exactly the background of a name is to be able to contribute it. If it were, I'm pretty sure we won't see too many contributions containing such names, especially in smaller localities. Or, to quote one of our more vocal fellow users, "This is DVD Profiler, not Name Profiler". 

I would say when it looks like a real name treat it like a real name. Even if we know it is a stage name. This way we don't have to worry about those that do not know and don't come to the forum.

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
I would say when it looks like a real name treat it like a real name. Even if we know it is a stage name. This way we don't have to worry about those that do not know and don't come to the forum.

I agree that his would be for all users the easiest way.    But would it be right according the rules? 
I always think we should do what we know and what is correct with what we know.
So if you would know that a name is a stage name and contribute it like this, but I wouldn't know I would contribute "normal".
At first perhaps not perfect, but we made both the best we can.
And perhaps at a point I would know better. If there would be "correct" entries I see, I would check and correct my cast enty also. (Or perhaps the name proposal in DVDP can bring me on the right way)

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
Quoting Ace_of_Sevens:

Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
Ignore me 

no

OK... Don't then! 

Quoting VirusPil:

Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
I would say when it looks like a real name treat it like a real name. Even if we know it is a stage name. This way we don't have to worry about those that do not know and don't come to the forum.

I agree that his would be for all users the easiest way.    But would it be right according the rules? 
I always think we should do what we know and what is correct with what we know.
So if you would know that a name is a stage name and contribute it like this, but I wouldn't know I would contribute "normal".
At first perhaps not perfect, but we made both the best we can.
And perhaps at a point I would know better. If there would be "correct" entries I see, I would check and correct my cast enty also. (Or perhaps the name proposal in DVDP can bring me on the right way)

I don't see why there wouldn't be. There is no rule defining what we (Invelos) consider a stage name. And no rule on parsing regular names. So if we come to the conclusion that if it looks like a real name then we treat it as a real name it would indeed be per Rules. Note that there is no stage names that look like real names in the examples given.

Agree, that it isn't defined what is a stage name.

Quote:
If an actor name is only a first name or stage name enter it entirely in the first name field. Examples are Cher, Madonna, Cedric the Entertainer & Queen Latifah.

Just with the examples given the first two are just one name, second one can't be a real name ... so all clear.
But what is with Queen Latifah as example? If some call their son "Prince" why wouldn't it be possible that "Queen" isn't just a normal first name?
So we have still no definiton what would be a stage name, but imho also no clarity, that we can treat stage names that look like normal names as normal names.

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
Queen Latifah is a pretty well known stage name. Her real name is Dana Elaine Owens  SEE HERE.

Yes it is for me, for you and perhaps for many others. And a example always should be something many can follow.

So if there would be Rofessor Toru Tanaka or Toru Tanaka as example, would it be different? I think: No.
Perhaps some know it's a stage name and for them is absolutely clear to treat it like this and put all in first field. Perhaps some don't know it's a stage name and put it in first and last field.
So both made right with what they know.

I don't think we can make differences between well known stage names and unknown stage names.

Hope you can understand a little bit what I wanted to say. And hope it didn't sound like argueing.

I see a pretty obvious difference that one looks like a real first and last name... and the other don't... but I am happy to agree to disagree with you on that.