It has been previously noted in the forum that some UK versions and US (especially PBS) versions of some mini-series,  films,  etc. are not exactly the same. The PBS versions have been shortened by merging episodes together.

Others have complained about this practice, and I also am not happy with this practice.
I would prefer to see the media as the artists intended it.

Thus the practice of blindly taking the UK cast & crew credits and plugging them into the US PBS version as a quick and easy way of profiling may sometimes result in a erroneous profile.

Example:
The PBS version of Collision UPC  841887011372 is 200 minutes and two episodes
and
the UK version is 300 minutes and five episodes.

The PBS version of Place of Execution UPC 841887011389 is two episodes
and
the UK version is three episodes.

No matter where one obtains the cast and crew credits they must checked against the actual DVD credits. In today's world there are just to many versions of the same media on DVD to blindly copy cast and crew credits.

You and me both, Neill. Especially by those users who insist on blindly copying one dataset to every copy in the word. You know who you are. Credits are not universally the same across the board. At least, please check your Actual data for the copy/version you are submitting against what is in the database. Such blind copying should always be voted NO and declined.

Kulju:

That IS my opinion and always has been and for you to suggest it is something else is simply...argumentative at the least...I won't make any other comment that i coukld make.

What IS a FACT iis that we KNOW that Cast and Crew credits are not necessarily universally the SAME across Versions/Borders or even media. Have any of you ever taken a good hard look at TV broadcasts of any given movie, probably NOT, but a lot of times things are done differently from the theatrical or DVD release. So for anyone to make global changes across the entire database simply based on a single version is well....NUTS.

Guilty as charged. I must admit that I have done that in the past. However, I only apply it in two cases:

1. from parent to child for a TV boxset. Often only the parent has the entire cast/crew listing of that season, so I just copy-paste the episodes to the appropriate child profile. Since it's basically the same disc being profiled, I don't think there's a problem there

2. from profile to profile with the same disc ID: this often happens with Warner TV series: they reuse the same discs (identical disc ID and all) and just slap a different ratings logo on it. In those cases, I also copy cast/crew from for example the US box set to the UK box set. Again, we're basically talking about the exact same disc but released in a different locality, so I also don't see a problem with that either

For other cases, I think it's OK to copy-paste to save time, as Ken and Gerri allow it, but always better to cross-reference with the actual credits.

Quoting Kulju:

Quote:
Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
Such blind copying should always be voted NO and declined.

No matter what me or you personally think, this is not true by the rules. So, this is your opinion, not a fact.

Actually, it is not true by the rules.  While this is a common practice, the rules do not mention copying cast and crew from another profile.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting Kulju:

Quote:
Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
Such blind copying should always be voted NO and declined.

No matter what me or you personally think, this is not true by the rules. So, this is your opinion, not a fact.

Actually, it is not true by the rules.  While this is a common practice, the rules do not mention copying cast and crew from another profile.

I stand corrected, but my point was that since it came from Ken that it is allowed we cannot vote no for such contributions if source UPC can be found from contribution notes.

This has been discussed many times over the years. Here is a link to which I am quoting myself (below) and my feelings on the matter: http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=490629&PageNum=1&messageID=1396630#M1396630.

"I have a slightly different view on this matter.

I often Copy and Paste data from one DVD to another. I check the contribution notes and if this data is taken from the credits or other legitimate  sources, that is acceptable to me.

I try to always remember to document exactly which DVD I took this information and what those documentation notes say.

Now, there might be the rare instances in which there is a discrepancy. I don't have a problem with that and neither does Ken or Gerri. Why? For several reasons.

The first reason is that when I contribute to the database I am likely to be contributing a complete profile. Cast and Crew are only a small part of what I am checking and updating.

Ken has stated that a small mistake contained within a larger contribution is an acceptable trade off. But, I haven't found that cloning Cast and Crew contains that many mistakes.

Cast and Crew are, in the majority of cases, the same. The people that worked on the film does not change. So, I am confident that the data is correct in most cases.

There might be the rare instance that the Cast and Crew differ from one DVD to the next but they are few and can be dealt with on an individual basis.

I often am updating hundreds of obvious mistakes that are rampant in the database. These are time consuming enough as it is without having to spend more time double checking the work of others. I might as well do everything myself and that is not what this database is about.

The database is built on the contributions of the community. Eventually every DVD will be checked and any errors or omissions will be taken care of."

Quoting Kulju:

Quote:
I stand corrected, but my point was that since it came from Ken that it is allowed we cannot vote no for such contributions if source UPC can be found from contribution notes.

It's seems so easy to say that...but, in reality, the RULES are the only solid source for people to refer to.

I see many names contributing that I have never seen participating in this forum - therefore, it is safe to assume that of these people only a very small percentage lurk and have seen Ken's decision on this matter.

The majority of people will have no idea Ken ever said such a thing and would be completely correct to vote NO to such an update - on the ground that the information has NOT been taken from the credits.

This is the very reason why I have stated in another thread that Invelos need to give control of the rules updates to someone else - someone who can update the rules quickly and easily whenever Ken/Gerri make a ruling in the forum.

Until they do that even their decisions in the forum are practically useless.