Mika:

Not if it departs from the data that is supplied by the film. That is part of the reason that other databases are the mess that they are. They have set no standards for their users. Each set of film credits is unique unto itself, and different versions are sometimes also unique unto themselves, there are sometimes difference in Credits from one version to another.

I have said many times that were I Ken I would not have implemented the linking as he has done. One thing that has been mentioned of late is assigning a Unique ID # to each person, while that sounds good, it's still just another form of priority naming, off which all variants will play to. I don't know, I have always supported  Simple Association, it is the easiest, it is not dependent on user input. It ukltimately becomes a local issue...because that's where the linking done anyway...but we would still want to be able to share the associations as they are set up.

And by the way, I actually think you have a decent grip on it.

Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:
Alright I get you.
I can see what you and we all here are talking about.

But at least one thing then, that should be a problem, is that we constantly need to redo something that others already have done, if they didn't go through all the theoretically necessary steps, when they added a name which has several variants, and the do not know the common name.

Thus, it will take lots of time until that data is corrected.
And currently, there are I am sure thousands of titles and of course even more names that need to be checked and corrected.

For example, in my collection I have 4 counts of Rebecca Romijn and equally many as her "common name"...

But there are worse examples, when the names of the actor or crew member isn't so similar.

One feature could be something which "auto adjusts" the typed in name, so that it becomes the common name, or at least in some intelligent way suggests the common name in a clever way.
Or that it just checks for variants...

Can you explain in short how the Simple Association works?
I haven't heard about it. Maybe write me a PM, as it's a little off topic.

Another thing that just came to mind which is also off topic, is that what if you see a person credited by his "nick name", but you know his real name. Is it then OK to add that to the DB?
Sorry to go off topic and ask such basic Q's. But I blame it on how tired I am.

Quoting MikaLove:

Quote:
Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:
Alright I get you.
I can see what you and we all here are talking about.

But at least one thing then, that should be a problem, is that we constantly need to redo something that others already have done, if they didn't go through all the theoretically necessary steps, when they added a name which has several variants, and the do not know the common name.

Thus, it will take lots of time until that data is corrected.
And currently, there are I am sure thousands of titles and of course even more names that need to be checked and corrected.

For example, in my collection I have 4 counts of Rebecca Romijn and equally many as her "common name"...

But there are worse examples, when the names of the actor or crew member isn't so similar.

One feature could be something which "auto adjusts" the typed in name, so that it becomes the common name, or at least in some intelligent way suggests the common name in a clever way.
Or that it just checks for variants...

Can you explain in short how the Simple Association works?
I haven't heard about it. Maybe write me a PM, as it's a little off topic.

Another thing that just came to mind which is also off topic, is that what if you see a person credited by his "nick name", but you know his real name. Is it then OK to add that to the DB?
Sorry to go off topic and ask such basic Q's. But I blame it on how tired I am.

The grand scheme of DVDP is that the credit that you see on the screen is the credit that gets entered. so if a credit says Jake Smith (even though Jake is a nickname and his real name is Joe) you will Enter Jake Smith into the field.

If Joe Smith has been entered before, and you find him in the crew list, you can you that name, as long as

1. you enter the screen credit into the "Credited as" field
2. you can prove that Jake Smith and Joe Smith are indeed the same person
3. Show that Joe Smith is a more common usage than Jake Smith within the profiler online DB.

These are the restrictions.

Now if Jake Smith is his more common usage then Jake Smith is entered into the name field, without reference to Joe Smith.  If you own any of the other titles with Joe Smith, then you can update those profiles and show Jake Smith as the common name and Joe Smith as the credited name.

In all cases, the "Credited As" field must match the on screen credit for the disc you are auditing.

With the previous being said, the system is inefficient and tedious and prone to errors.  Is there a better way of doing it, in my mind yes, along with other users.  But unfortunately they all require a program and rule change.  So until ken decides to change it, we must work within the parameters we have.

@CharlieM:
So you are saying that in order to enter a person's REAL name, the name needs to already be in the DB (what the if it wasn't known before, etc?) and it needs to be "more common"?

Maybe I just found the weak spot...

In Sweden (like in so many other countries), we have musical artists which have a stage name and, of course, a real name. In most cases, both of those are known, especially by fans.
I could take some examples, but they wouldn't mean much to you because the artists aren't probably known to you.

I don't see the "error" of adding a person's real name into the DB, as long as you are positive that it is the same person.

I think that rule would only be an obstacle.

Personally, because I AM interested in people's real names.

But also, as illustrated in the second example:
If the artist is featured in a movie, but in it he goes by his real name and not the artist name, he will be credited as his real name. Still, using the "common name" rule, you would have his real name under "credited as".
Now rewind a bit and it is not really for sure that his real name is in the DB, if you don't add it with these credits, that has his real name...

OK, a bit confusing as to what I'm trying(?) to say, but I mean that SOME people think it's "cool information" to have real names in the DB, even if they are rarely and sometimes never used.

Regardless of what we decide here and now, some people with me still think it'd be neat if there was the ability to link names together.
But also, it's naive to trust every user to add correct, unmodified data, or to not add superfluous data.
All that, are things that us more "picky" people who want a DB with full integrity, will have to correct later on. And meanwhile, the DB will be cluttered up with erroneous info or multiple entries.
I myself have found a few, while only looking sporadically.

Right, Mika. We are interested in the most commonly credited name, not necessarily the "real" or the "correct" name.

The error Mika, as you put it, is that we are credit driven. The filmmakers supply the data with the film, that is all we go with. Some other databases and we even have some users that think they know more than the filmmakers. But the credits are our bible, you are free to do whatever you wish locally in YOUR owbn database but for Contribution purposes we have to have a standard for data entry and that is the credits. that way we are all entering data the same way and we don't have users making a mess by running off and doing their own thing.

I wish I could fix the linking, only ken can do that. I CAN do that....in my dreams.

Take Cedric The Entertainer, this is the stage name for Cedric Antonio Kyles.  I know this, and so do 1000's of others.

For DVD Profilers purpose, we do not care that his real name is Cedric Antonio Kyles.  I have actually never seen him credited that way in any movie.  He is always credited as Cedric The Entertainer.  Therefore this is his credited name and his Credited As name

Now take Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.  At the beginning he was credited only as "The Rock", therefor we only entered "The Rock".  Some where along the way he started a transition.  to switch from "The rock" to Dwayne Johnson, he used Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, to keep name recognition.  So the first few were entered in "The Rock[Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson]  Because The Rock was more common.  After a few moer movies Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson became more common than "The Rock", So now we go back and MANUALLY edit the previous profiles of "The Rock" and now they say Dwayne  "The Rock" Johnson (The Rock)  and all the newer ones now say Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson".  Next phase, He drops "The Rock" and Dwayne Johnson is now more common (I think).  Now all the originals are Dwayne Johnson(The Rock), second gen are Dwayne Johnson(Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson), and third generation now is just (Dwayne Johnson).

I know this is long, but it does show that we do not care about what his actual name is, only the credited entry.  It also does show a fault with our currently implemented system.

(Heaven for bid, if there is another Dwayne Johnson born in 1972.)

Charlie

The linking system must be derived from the ACTUAL credits, not the other way around, at least relative to the Online. The only question there is the best way, and i think most of us agree that the current system is not very workable, but there are answers. Will Ken change it to something else or leave us with what we have...I have no idea, he's the Programmer and it's his Program. I can say what I would do, but he does not have to go that way. Although I will say what I have always said, the method he chose makes no sense to me, but c'est la vie.