Of course, the best source of data is the DVD itself.

But, Ken and invelos allow for data to be cloned from an accepted profile in the invelos database to another profile for contribution.

Invelos has even made this feature easy by letting one copy, past and append directly on the Cast and Crew Edit page. I frequently use this feature as it saves a lot of time and typing.

It has also been my experience that in the vast majority of cases, the credits are exactly the same when I double check the cloned data with the actual credits.

In the rare instances that there are any differences, these can be fixed by the community when it gets to it. Ken even allows for a few mistakes if the majority of a profile is correct.

On a rare occasion I have found a contributor has lied about where they got their data from. For example I have seen contribution notes stating data was taken from the DVD credits but were actually taken verbatim from IMDb.

This, in my opinion, is the issue that compromises the contribution process and the database accuracy more than any other, including cloning.

Of course an occasional mistake happens, but most people are honest and they actually check the data that they are contributing. And, since invelos does allow cloning, I am confident that most, if not all of the data I have copied is legitimate.

In order to make this process even a little more accurate, there are a couple of things I do when I do clone a profile.

I always check the contribution notes to see where the data I am cloning was taken from and I document this information.

I also include the UPC or EAN numbers of the cloned profile so that the community can check that profile.

So, my notes would be something like "Cast and Crew copied from the same film in the invelos database UPC 000000-000000. Documentation notes this data came directly from the DVD credits."

I often update several dozen DVDs at a time adding/correcting data as needed. When I do these updates I am not going to take the time to go through all the credits unless I actually watch the movie.

Once I do get to seeing the movie, I do double check all the data for that DVD against the credits making additions or changes as applicable.

Eventually, the database will become more and more accurate as the community will eventually get around to double checking the DVD credits and changing or updating as needed.

If I copy and past a cast and crew from another accepted profile. I always check the cast and crew credits from my DVD before I contribute. I personally watch every movie I do a contribution for. The reason I think contributions may be down are a combination of reasons 1. lack of interest, I see about 15 steady people making contributions for the 3900 DVD's that I own. Unless somebody gets a new scanner, then you see alot of new scans that are not needed. And 2. alot of the old profiles from the change over in 2007 have been updated to include the new crew additions.

My only issue is when I do an edit I add the credited name. and sometimes I don't have the time to check BY forum (needs to be updated so all the BY are in the first few pages) and common name threads or CLT (which is still a train wreck) so I'll just use credited as. If it passes fine, CLT gains correct info. if it doesn't oh well I have the correct credited screen name in my personal database(which has any avalible BY or middle initial I can find in it.

Ateo and Scott

I applaud both you. Keep up the good work.

I applaud you too Charlie, but you knew that. Your work is nothing short of stellar.

Quoting Kathy:

Quote:
Quoting CharlieM:

Quote:
Another thought...

People are making the assumption that these profiles will be corrected later, by the community.

How can you be so confident on any given profile???


Just a thought..


Charlie

Since the only DVD I ever clone are ones I own, and will eventually watch, I know that they will eventually be corrected if need be.

That is interesting.  With a collection of over 10k, what is eventually? 

Even if you watch 5 a day, how long before you go through them all? 

I would not even guarantee that I would watch any given movie in my collection within 3 years.  So if I blind copied a profile, I might get to correcting the errors sometime in three years. 

So if you inject "different errors" into the DB, how is that any better than leaving the existing errors?

Or how about, injecting new errors into a DB, where the only error before was an error of "omission"?

I don't mean to seem to attack any 1 person, but I have seen this attitude before, in the last discussion we had on the subject. 

If you were to ask yourself, the general accuracy of the online DB, is it better than it was 3 years ago, and if it is, is it 3 years better (or only marginally better).  If the answer is "only marginally" better, then ask yourself why.

Charlie

Quoting Kathy:

Quote:

I spend many hours every week contributing to this database. I take offense that I am "lazy" because I do the work I want to do.

Where did I accuse you of being "lazy".  I do not know you well enough to call you lazy or otherwise.?

Where did I say you did not follow the rules?

The only thing I questioned is your motivation.  Why you do it.  What would drive you to take 1 accepted profile, that is relatively accurate, and replace it with another that is relatively accurate. 

I do not see all of your contributions, most I understand and am ok with,  but a couple (few) that I have seen, I have questioned why?  Some I have seen from you correct some errors, but add other errors.  Basically these few profiles accomplish nothing overall in the end.

This does not make any sense to me.

Charlie

Well, it didn't take long for the malicious posts to begin again. First time I've used the red arrow in 6 months or so.

On a friendlier note Kathy, the last thing I want to do is fight. What I remember of Mickey Blue Eyes from memory is it was released originally around 2000 by Warner in a snapper and stasis Hugh Grant, Jeanne Tripplehorn and James Caan. I can also recall that for se reason I had a duplicate copy of it<shrugs>