Well, these days I am not really happy with the update process! I had another thread about some technical issues but this is about

HOW COULD SO MANY UPDATES BE ALLOWED, ALTOUGH THEY ARE BREAKING THE RULES?

and

WHY ARE SOME UPDATES DECLINDE ALTOUGH THEY KEEP THE RULES?

To the first: I don't know what to say but it sucks. No matter how big your collection is, you could be part of my anger with the issue of the "Original Title", in this case the name of TV Series.
Could you imagine how many updates I just had to check when the original title suddenly looks like

SERIES TITLE - NUMBER OF THE SEASON - Disc XXX ?

Especially if this breaking the rules change is the only change the update brings, it's a huge load of wasted time! Are their contributers which don't know the rules, don't care about the rules or simply ignore them? Imagine the times I have to waste to lock this wrong original title for several series with several seasons with several discs 

Part 2 is my declined uploads: The rules say kind of "the CLT is the definition of the database for the spelling of a name". Not any forum thread (no matter how good anyone cares about) or anything else.

So if I spend countless hours in contributions (more than 2000 within the last 8 months!), and they include corrections of name spellings, based on the CLT, but are declined because of any thread in the forum, I could lose my interest in contributing! As long as there is not defined any thread in the forum BY THE RULES as a responsible source for names - what means: as long as I care about all defined sources - I can't accept all those "No because of the common name thread".

If the CLT is wrong (and it seems to be), then first of all
- it should be replaced by the rules by the thread or
- there should be any kind of "automatic work" to clean the whole database at once.

The last sounds like a load of work, but maybe there is still anybody "out there" who could write tools to "repair" the database?

An enhancement to "reduce" the database but make it easier would be a technical solution:
So many movies (or series, but for them the episode titles are the problem) are released in several versions on DVD, BluRay and partially HDDVD in several countries. In my opinion the cast & crew of ALL of these versions should only be part of the database ONCE, connected with countless UPC/EAN & Disc-IDs. This way we would never have 137 different versions of cast & crew of the same movie and if there is any update, it would be for ALL of them at the same time. I know we are missing the founder, so this way this technical solution - if ever possible - could only be done in a future, far far away, but in my opinion it would solve a lot.

I am also missing part of the "know how" of some contributers, if they want to change the country of a profile to a country which didn't even exist at this point of time (the old fun with Czech Republic and Czechoslovakia).

Next step which happens again and again and again BREAKING THE RULES:

If a DVD/BluRay has a Barcode/UPC/EAN, then this is the one to be used. Only if not, then the Disc-ID is responsible for. When I created the profiles for "Magnum, P. I." a couple of years ago, the problem was, that the seasons inside the box set had no UPC, so the whole season got the profile by the Disc-ID of disc #1. And what updates do I recieve now? The profile for the whole season gets an update for just Disc #1! And this simply is WRONG and SUCKS!
Esecially as this is work for me once again to lock all items of the profile that they are not replaced by simply wrong data!
There was kind of the same problem the other direction a couple of weeks ago with "Polizeiinspektion Eins": Seasons which HAD a UPC/EAN got a profile with the Disc-ID! I got the luck that my updates with the correct data made their way, but anyhow it's confusing to find so many problems which could be solved if contributers read, know, accept and handle by the rules!

I please all of you which accept contributions or not: Care about these rules! In the past nearly everyone did, and if someone did not, the contribution simply was declined. Now I see updates week by week which don't fit the rules but made their way. I can't believe how this happened!

One more point to add: Correct "arrangement" of names. We hafe First Name (F), Middle Name (M) and Name (N) but I got updates with horrible versions of names:

(F) Hans (M) Smith
(F) Hans (N) J. Smith
(F) Susie (M) Saint (N) James

or then names of bands like
(F) The (N) Bandname

I am at a point where I think about creating kind of a test for all who want to contribute. And only with doing all questions of the test BY THE RULES they get a license. Just imagine you get updates for 100 profiles (my last ones were for more than 1000, the further 1400 were "No Differences Detecte", but that's another problem), and with most of them your database becomes worse instead of better.

Meanwhile I am part of this community for nearly 14 years and recognized several changes. But actually it is a huge disappointment how "bending" the rules (or ignoring them?) partially step by step destroys something which once was not even good but nearly perfect! I know this is just another claim of myself in a forum with so many threads that nobody could read at least half of them. But I'd prefer a HUGE change to make better again what once was so well.....

By the way: If you see that their are several updates for your database, do you check every single one or do you simply accept them without any control?

I can't speak to most of your concerns, but as far as the name arrangement, you can correct it to what it's supposed to be and contribute it (Susan/no middle name/Saint James for example). This way, in the future, even if someone changes it back (wrongly), it won't affect you local database. I've had to do this several times. It's just contributors who don't care, simply put. It WILL, however, show up as a change if someone does that. Frustrating, yes, but it something I've learned to deal with. All of this being said, you CAN lock your profiles and refuse any updates for some or any of your titles. I have done this for several of my profiles. Hope this helps.

Eric

Quoting Magmadrag:

Quote:
So if I spend countless hours in contributions (more than 2000 within the last 8 months!), and they include corrections of name spellings, based on the CLT, but are declined because of any thread in the forum, I could lose my interest in contributing! As long as there is not defined any thread in the forum BY THE RULES as a responsible source for names - what means: as long as I care about all defined sources - I can't accept all those "No because of the common name thread".

If the CLT is wrong (and it seems to be), then first of all
- it should be replaced by the rules by the thread or
- there should be any kind of "automatic work" to clean the whole database at once.

The last sounds like a load of work, but maybe there is still anybody "out there" who could write tools to "repair" the database?

The CLT is often outdated and incorrect, with the forums being the source of data which has been thoroughly checked and compiled to remove any confusion about common names.

As GSyren mentioned, the rules don't reflect this and now give undue weight to the CLT. It would be better if they were updated and rewritten to give birth year and common name threads priority status for contributing that information.

To think about the CLT: I always expected that this was never done manually but is kind of a "summary" of all the profiles in the database? And I think that was the reason how/why it became part of the rules.

If it was created by any "manual" action, or anyone "in the back" should run any tool again to create kind of a new summary to update the CLT, why isn't it done for so long that more and more manual lists get more and more importance?

Now that I think about it, the common name threads would be the source for information required to prepare a dictionary. How about that for a nice project for somebody? Simple dictionary: Key = name variant. Value = common name. So, it would be possible to automate getting all credits for any common name, by collecting all variants with value=common name, then aggregate the CLT results.

If somebody makes the dictionary available somewhere on the network, I would be happy to access it from CLTBoss.

And on top of that, it is possible to add custom fields to the cast and crew that would capture common names.

If Invelos ever rises like the Phoenix, the dictionary and custom fields design will be there waiting for "Ken" to include in a future release.

Quoting Danae Cassandra:

Quote:
The problem with the CLT is that there is still a lot of incorrect, imdb mined info in the database.  You can see this in the many nickname variants that have single quotes ' rather than double quotes " around the name.  Almost invariably these are proven incorrect when the credits are checked.  You can see it in any profile where you have a credit for someone as archive footage.  Those are completely from imdb.

If profiles had been entered correctly we wouldn't have this problem.  We must remember that the CLT only scours the database, so it is only as good as the data that is entered.

What you say is almost correct. The CLT does not establish a common name. It is simply a query tool. Therefore, it cannot have a "problem" unless it inaccurately collects the data. As far as I know, it is accurate. It is the underlying data that is incorrect. And an inadequate database design that does not account for a common name. (Oh, I see you also said the same at the end. So we are on same page.  )

He fell into my trap!!!   

Of course I have seen your signature, and who do you think I would vote for, as the "Common Name Czar"? 

The role of the Common Name Czar is to provide that missing link: decide on the common name. No committee, no years long wars. Just make the decision. Add all the entries from the common name thread (your spreadsheet).

The only thing missing is the common name linkage. Everybody knows it, everybody complains about it. But one person has the raw data - or a good head start on it. Now, all we need to do is use it. If we can just agree on one thing: just trust one person to make a reasonable decision on the common name. And get started. Otherwise, spend another 10 years (I'll be gone ...    ) complaining about it.

Quoting Magmadrag:
Meanwhile I am part of this community for nearly 14 years


So in 14 years you've only voted on 54 contributions?