Quoting ObiKen:

Quote:
Quoting ninso4:

Quote:
But there is another question whether this credit should be entered into the database at all.
In another Spanish film Abre los ojos this credit appears:



The S.L. at the and indicates that Goldstein & Steinberg isn't just those two sound editor but a company. We do not credit companies in the crew section (apart from group dividers).
The credit in Tesis doesn't have the S.L. at the end but it also could be a credit for the company.

You forgot to mention there was another SOUND credit for "Goldstein & Steinberg" (no S.L. suffix) in Abre los ojos.

So we have these credits in the one film:
Sound ==> Goldstein & Steinberg
Sound Editor ==> Goldstein & Steinberg, S.L.

The film's credits clearly distinguished which one is a company name, and that is reflected in both BFI and IMDB records for Daniel Goldstein and Ricardo Steinberg (sound credit but NO sound editor credit (the actual sound editors were Nacho Royo and Pelayo Gutiérrez).

Option 4 is not a valid option because there was no basis for connecting the company name ("Goldstein & Steinberg, S.L.") with the individual credit ("Goldstein & Steinberg") to begin with, had the full facts about the film's credits been provided.

I treat "Goldstein & Steinberg" no differently to say, Rodgers & Hammerstein" or "Boyce & Hart" or "Scott and Dyer", it is a credit for individuals.

The film Tesis (aka "Thesis) used the same credits for sound as Abre los ojos, and that is why I voted for option 1.

I'm not swayed.

If anything, ninso4 argues for the uncertainty of the credit. For the credit to possibly be invalid.
Like GSyren wrote below, we can't simply know.

To take the credits from one film as "proof" for the credits in another, is simply outrageous. And naturally against the rules.

We don't have "Sound Editor ==> Goldstein & Steinberg, S.L." in Tesis, which is the movie in question.

For those voting for option 1, where's your proof?
Or do you vote 1 just because it looks neat and/or you don't want to omit the credit?

It's not at all "clear" that just because the credits for Tesis doesn't include the company suffix, that it isn't a company. At the very least, documentation is needed.

Perhaps if there's anyone with more time on their hands they could do some digging.
It's a quite well-known movie so I don't think it would be impossible.
If we just look at the current situation though, I think there's more reason to assume it's a company rather than not. Since we don't know. And, the poll for option 4 is in majority anyway.