Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum rules before posting.

Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free registration is required.

If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.

    Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Previous   Next
About common names
Author Message
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorT!M
Profiling since Dec. 2000
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
Netherlands Posts: 8,665
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
Back on topic: I'm not entirely sure what the goal of this thread is. Is the idea to invalidate all common name-finding threads entirely, and just always go by the raw CLT numbers instead? That would be a really bad idea - it would, in most cases, simply boil down to: "let's use the IMDb-name". I really don't believe that's what we want, and that certainly wasn't Ken's intention either.

Ken's key quote on the matter is here:
Quote:
The lookup tool is not to be blindly trusted, however it does outweigh other sources, including autographs.  The common name is not intended to always reflect the "real name", but the most commonly credited name.

However, if a user documents errors in the database where the credit is not entered properly, that can and should be considered.  Better yet, correct the entries, assuming you own the discs in question, thereby correcting the lookup results.

That second half of this statement from 2007 is where common name-finding threads came from: this statement is what started them. "If a user documents errors in the database where the credit is not entered properly, that can and should be considered" - that's what common name-finding threads are, that's exactly what they do. These threads serve as documentation that certain credits appearing in the CLT aren't entered properly, and, per Ken's statement, those findings subsequently not only can but should be considered. So that's what we've been doing ever since.
 Last edited: by T!M
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorT!M
Profiling since Dec. 2000
Registered: March 13, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
Netherlands Posts: 8,665
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
For those who want more reading material: others have implied that before there was no basis for common name-finding threads, only to be shot down by Ken Cole. In this thread from 2010, Addicted2DVD eventually explicitly asks Ken: "Ken... if you see this... tell me I am reading too much into this... and threads like this to prove the CLT is wrong is still ok." And Ken answers that yes, he is reading too much into this - using common name-finding threads to prove that the CLT numbers are wrong remains valid.

Ken subsequently also posted this (bottom of the page), saying "Some were interpreting this to mean the CLT result is the correct common name regardless of other factors", and then explaining that that's not the case.

Quoting Ken Cole:
Quote:
The bottom line is simple - we're after the most commonly credited name.  As in the original post, and in this post, the best solution is to correct the incorrect profiles so the CLT reflects the most commonly credited name.
 Last edited: by T!M
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorGSyren
Profiling since 2001
Registered: March 14, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
Sweden Posts: 4,508
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
The reason for this thread is that I wanted to find out - if possible - what Ken's thoughts about the commmon name threads were. I wasn't convinced by the quote that was presented.
Quote:
The lookup tool is not to be blindly trusted, however it does outweigh other sources, including autographs. 
That rather speaks against common name threads.
Quote:
The common name is not intended to always reflect the "real name", but the most commonly credited name.
I take that to mean "the most commonly credited name in the online database", since that is what the CLT does. If he meant something else, surely he would have clarified that.
Quote:
However, if a user documents errors in the database where the credit is not entered properly, that can and should be considered.
The common name threads do not actually point out profiles where the credit is not entered correctly.
Quote:
Better yet, correct the entries, assuming you own the discs in question, thereby correcting the lookup results.
Update the profiles and the CLT result works better. I'm all for that.

While I'm convinced that the common name threads are actually counter productive, it's not important what I think. And it's not important what "we" want. It's still Ken's database, and it's important what he wants. That's why I was hoping for some quotes where he directly commented on the common name threads.

If the goal is to improve name linking, then surely it is easiest to keep the names that are already most common in the online database? Also, like I have already pointed out, having two different ways of determining common names is not a good thing. Add to that the fact that there is nothing in the rules that indicates the use of common names, which means that users that don't follow the forums will be left in the dark.

However, if I can be convinced that this is actually what Ken wanted, then I can stop obsessing about it and accept it even if I don't agree with it.
My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile Registrantmediadogg
Aim high. Ride the wind.
Registered: March 18, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United States Posts: 6,396
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting T!M:
Quote:

Ken subsequently also posted this (bottom of the page), saying "Some were interpreting this to mean the CLT result is the correct common name regardless of other factors", and then explaining that that's not the case.
Quoting Ken Cole:
Quote:
The bottom line is simple - we're after the most commonly credited name.  As in the original post, and in this post, the best solution is to correct the incorrect profiles so the CLT reflects the most commonly credited name.

Can't get much clearer than that!

The part that confuses me is what does "to correct" mean? Does that mean to set the "Credited As" field correctly? I think so, because in my experience, the CLT (and likewise CLTBoss) will then ignore FML.

Unfortunately, since the CreditedAs field is so often blank, the CLT would be entirely useless, if in fact it didn't look at anything else, as Ken (incorrectly) asserted in those quotes. I am thinking of putting an option into CLTBoss for that - "CreditedAs Only" and see what you get.
Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog.
 Last edited: by mediadogg
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributoryeshee
Registered: July 29, 2007
Reputation: Superior Rating
Posts: 482
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
I think a major problem in this discussion is the definition of the phrase „most commonly credited name“.

An artist gets credited for his work on a project.
When we collect different releases/translations/variants of this project, the artist still got credited once for it.
Unfortunately the CLT counts the titles not the original titles, thats why there is almost always a much bigger number of titles than actual works.

If we were after the most collected credit the titles number could be disregarded completely.

So what do the common names threads do?
identify wrong entries – that's covered in above quotes
count the actual credits – this interpretation of the above quotes seems as valid as any other, but way more logical (in my eyes at least).

Some examples I just counted today, where the difference may not be deciscive but visible:

James Sabat 101 titles for 81 films,  James J. Sabat 37 titles for 27 films,  12 films counted for both
Lonnie Smith 27 titles for 16 films,  Lonnie R. Smith 16 titles for 10 films,  4 films counted for both
Lane Bradbury 40 titles for 18 films,  Janette Lane Bradbury 16 titles for 6 films,  2 films counted for both
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile RegistrantStar ContributorAiAustria
Profiling since 2004
Registered: May 19, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
Austria Posts: 5,703
Posted:
PM this userDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting yeshee:
Quote:
Unfortunately the CLT counts the titles not the original titles, thats why there is almost always a much bigger number of titles than actual works.

That is not correct. The CLT counts: original title x Production year

Wrong counts come out of:
- missing or wrong original titles
- wrong production years
- a big mess in TV shows: we could never find an agreement on how to enter original titles for TV shows -> with/out Season Indicator, with/out Disc number; neither on which production year to enter -> the year of the the first episode of the season or the year of the profiled episode...
Complete list of Common Names  •  A good point for starting with Headshots (and v11.1)
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile Registrantmediadogg
Aim high. Ride the wind.
Registered: March 18, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United States Posts: 6,396
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageDirect link to this postReply with quote
Here is a novel concept: is anyone willing to spend as much time creatively suggesting possible solutions in lieu of all the energy expended, constantly rehashing and complaining about the mess? Or maybe that's the fun, after all? A solution would be boring. Now somebody will say, "if you are so smart, why don't you solve it?". Not saying I know the solution, but for me, the fun is creatively looking for one, as opposed to endlessly complaining about the problem. (Oh no, now I get kicked off the Forum    ).
Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributoryeshee
Registered: July 29, 2007
Reputation: Superior Rating
Posts: 482
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting AiAustria:
Quote:
Quoting yeshee:
Quote:
Unfortunately the CLT counts the titles not the original titles, thats why there is almost always a much bigger number of titles than actual works.

That is not correct. The CLT counts: original title x Production year


I didn't think of that possibility, and after some counting - I stand corrected.

Although the colour changes in the clt listings represent a title change, I did not account for the possibility that the same title (as counted by the clt) could appear again further down the listing.
Now I know better. Thanks.

My main point however was to present the advantages of a common name search.

already in profile Mary K. F. Packer-Phillips, checking for variants leaves us with:
Mary K. F. Packer-Phillips 1/4
Mary K.F. Packer-Phillips 1/5
after checking the film credits and another variant search:
Mary K. E. Packer-Phillips 1/5
Mary K.E. Packer-Phillips 2/3 (includes a double feature box set with a second (older) film)
running it through the common name finding routine:
Mary K.E. Packer-Phillips - as all credits refer to the same role in that one movie, the only correct name is as credited there.

So, in this case the CLT would be accidently right - if you spot the typo. Even if it literally is the least used variant.
That's why I think the common names searches are the way to go.
Not to necessarily change the clt common name, but to find the common name the clt should (and would) produce with correct data.
 Last edited: by yeshee
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorGSyren
Profiling since 2001
Registered: March 14, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
Sweden Posts: 4,508
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting mediadogg:
Quote:
Quoting T!M:
Quote:

Ken subsequently also posted this (bottom of the page), saying "Some were interpreting this to mean the CLT result is the correct common name regardless of other factors", and then explaining that that's not the case.
Quoting Ken Cole:
Quote:
The bottom line is simple - we're after the most commonly credited name.  As in the original post, and in this post, the best solution is to correct the incorrect profiles so the CLT reflects the most commonly credited name.

Can't get much clearer than that!

Well, actually it could get clearer than that. "Regardless of other factors" is rather vague. Is Ken referring to the passus in the rules that says "If there is a dispute over whether the credit references the same person, documentation may be necessary"? If so, then yes, documentation of the most common name for each person would be necessary. But only in that case.

Also, Ken says "The lookup tool is not to be blindly trusted, however it does outweigh other sources", but the proponents of the common name threads seem to say that the CLT is not to be trusted at all.

Bottom line - I'm still not convinced.
My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile Registrantmediadogg
Aim high. Ride the wind.
Registered: March 18, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United States Posts: 6,396
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageDirect link to this postReply with quote
It seems I might be missing more than a little of the fundamental knowledge about this subject, and if so I apologize. But I am trying.

- I did not realize that there was some sort of dispute regarding common name vs. CLT

- I was not aware of the fact that there is a "common name routine". Where is this tool?

- was CLTBoss a total waste of time? I mean, you've got a tool that carefully grinds thru the online profiles, and all we ask it to do, is duplicate CLT results? Couldn't it be doing more while the covers are open?

Edit: I have been trying to post a thank you for the responses, but something is not working.
Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog.
 Last edited: by mediadogg
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorGSyren
Profiling since 2001
Registered: March 14, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
Sweden Posts: 4,508
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting mediadogg:
Quote:
I did not realize that there was some sort of dispute regarding common name vs. CLT
Well, the dispute is whether to always use the findings in the common name threads over the CLT results. Or rather if that was what Ken wanted.
Quote:
I was not aware of the fact that there is a "common name routine". Where is this tool?
Unclear, but I think that yeshee means the CLT.
Quote:
was CLTBoss a total waste of time?
Absolutely not! For one thing, unlike the CLT, CLTBoss (plus CLTInfo) lets you separate the result by credit, making it easier to determine if a name is likely to refer to more than one person. It also helps to find profiles with wrong production year or wrong original title, making it easier to fix these titles for those who want to take the time to do that. This of course helps to improve the ordinary CLT results.
My freeware tools for DVD Profiler users.
Gunnar
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributoryeshee
Registered: July 29, 2007
Reputation: Superior Rating
Posts: 482
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting mediadogg:
Quote:

- I did not realize that there was some sort of dispute regarding common name vs. CLT


As I under stand this thread it it whether the common name is defined by the clt result or by the common name finding threads. You could call i a dispute then.
I think the common name finding threads are just to improve the reliability of the common name where the clt lacks precision not due to it's algorithm but to the often flawed data it has to work with.

Quote:

- I was not aware of the fact that there is a "common name routine". Where is this tool?


Well I did phrase that mistakeable, I think.
What I meant was my manual workflow of breaking down the titles to the one original title, probable name variants and such.
No such automated tool unfortunately. Sorry.

Quote:

- was CLTBoss a total waste of time?


I couldn't say, as I haven't looked into that.
But probably not, as you most likely achieved what you wanted to or you wouldn't have published it.
I'll give it a try, maybe it works for me maybe it doesn't. But we have all different way we work best.

Sorry if my english has caused confusion, there was no harm or offence intended.
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile Registrantmediadogg
Aim high. Ride the wind.
Registered: March 18, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United States Posts: 6,396
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageDirect link to this postReply with quote
Ok, now back at my desktop. Maybe I can finally post this response. My phone was not working.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I so much appreciate the quick responses from GSyren and yeshee. Things are clearer now. I am just a mechanic in this subject area. Like a puppy eagerly awaiting the toss of some object. I go running and come back, tail wagging, with the stick, looking for a pat-pat and "atta boy!"

So what is that automated tool you wish for? That's my game. Tell me to "go fetch!" and maybe I can add it to CLTBoss. Or maybe it makes sense for somebody else to do it. The important thing is that we found out maybe the need for yet another tool to help people make accurate contributions. And I definitely support that goal.

I am still not totally sure what the common name is used for, and where, as a Profiler user, I see it. Maybe I'm just too old now.

If you want to try CLTBoss, you MUST view at least the overview demo video. Otherwise, I assure you, your attempt to use the plugin is likely to fail to please.
Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog.
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile Registrantmediadogg
Aim high. Ride the wind.
Registered: March 18, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United States Posts: 6,396
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageDirect link to this postReply with quote
Example:

Scraping Audit Report: 2/6/2021: Mary K._F. Packer-Phillips
Total UPCs Scraped = 4

Page 1: UPC Count = 4
------------------------------------------
5017188815383
683904630278
8422397403677
7393834434404

Scraping Audit Report: 2/6/2021: Mary K.F. Packer-Phillips
Total UPCs Scraped = 5

Page 1: UPC Count = 5
------------------------------------------
786936209761
786936228069
4011846009719
8711875944383
7896012256909

Scraping Audit Report: 2/6/2021: Mary K._E. Packer-Phillips
Total UPCs Scraped = 5

Page 1: UPC Count = 5
------------------------------------------
I255E4D99B624E535
I64E9729C0AFC399B
786936209761
8711875944376
3459370415230

Scraping Audit Report: 2/6/2021: Mary K.E. Packer-Phillips
Total UPCs Scraped = 3

Page 1: UPC Count = 3
------------------------------------------
683904630278
738329229344
IC73AB8609386E31F

After Scrape of CLT

After Scan of Online XML

I think a bug has been uncovered. Don't know why the third variant scan results are empty. I will review the error log.  I see an entry. Will get it debugged and fixed. Greenie for yeshee!
Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog.
 Last edited: by mediadogg
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorscotthm
Registered: March 20, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
United States Posts: 2,845
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
Absolutely not! For one thing, unlike the CLT, CLTBoss (plus CLTInfo) lets you separate the result by credit, making it easier to determine if a name is likely to refer to more than one person.

This reminds me that I've never understood why the CLT combines cast and crew into one lookup when the program keeps separate databases for cast and crew.  I've always felt there should have been two CLTs.

---------------
DVD Profiler Desktop and Mobile Registrantmediadogg
Aim high. Ride the wind.
Registered: March 18, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United States Posts: 6,396
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting scotthm:
Quote:
Quoting GSyren:
Quote:
Absolutely not! For one thing, unlike the CLT, CLTBoss (plus CLTInfo) lets you separate the result by credit, making it easier to determine if a name is likely to refer to more than one person.

This reminds me that I've never understood why the CLT combines cast and crew into one lookup when the program keeps separate databases for cast and crew.  I've always felt there should have been two CLTs.

---------------

It would be very easy to add checkboxes in CLTBoss for Cast and Crew that are defaulted to checked. Would that help you?
Thanks for your support.
Free Plugins available here.
Advanced plugins available here.
Hey, new product!!! BDPFrog.
    Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Previous   Next