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  Previous   Next
Counting titles/profiles for common names and how the auto filter affects the common name.
Author Message
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorsurfeur51
Since July 3, 2003
Registered: March 29, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
France Posts: 4,439
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Kathy:
Quote:
Ken has stated that rules will not cover every issue.

In this case, rules cover this issue : names as in credits, then use CLT results for common name. Clear and simple...
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorLewis_Prothero
Strength Through Unity
Registered: May 19, 2007
Reputation: Superior Rating
Germany Posts: 6,730
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting surfeur51:
Quote:
In this case, rules cover this issue : names as in credits, then use CLT results for common name. Clear and simple...


What the rules do NOT tell us is:
How to handle the problem that the found common name can (due to program limitations (i.e. auto.filter)) not be used as common name?
And all of a sudden it is not that clear and simple anymore.

Except for the majority of the participants of this poll.
You, of course, are free to handle it anyway you like.
It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?


Registrant since 05/22/2003
 Last edited: by Lewis_Prothero
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorAce_of_Sevens
Registered: December 10, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
Posts: 2,985
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
surfeur51: What are you even suggesting? If "John Smith Sr" has more hits than "John Smith, Sr," we enter the former and let the program change it to "John Smith, Jr" instead of entering ti that way ourselves, despite it making 0 difference in the result? That seems like a weird thing to get hung up on.

Alternatively, if you are sayign that if there are five credits under "John Smith Sr," seven under "John Smith, Sr" and eight under "John Smith," We should use John Smith as the common name, that seems like a really pedantic distinction to make for a guy usually creditted as Senior.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorsurfeur51
Since July 3, 2003
Registered: March 29, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
France Posts: 4,439
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Lewis_Prothero:
Quote:
How to handle the problem that the found common name can (due to program limitations (i.e. auto.filter)) not be used as common name?

This is what rules, as they exist today, request, not me. Ken could change that, but he has not yet modified the rules, and nobody can do that for him, even with a poll.

At present time, we only can handle those data as each data that program limitations do not allow to contribute :
- necessary fake birth years
- profiles of different movies with same UPC
- two movies on same face of disc
- headshots
- gallery photos
All these data are useful, and can be shared on the forums so each user can use them in their local , to obtain a linking database, that we do not havewith the online. Ken made a system that do not allow to contribute common names altered by his filter. That is not worse that the impossibility to distinguish two actors with same name and no known birthyear...
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorsurfeur51
Since July 3, 2003
Registered: March 29, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
France Posts: 4,439
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Ace_of_Sevens:
Quote:
Alternatively, if you are sayign that if there are five credits under "John Smith Sr," seven under "John Smith, Sr" and eight under "John Smith," We should use John Smith as the common name, that seems like a really pedantic distinction to make for a guy usually creditted as Senior.

I say nothing. Rules ask to do that. You find it pedantic ? You are probably right, but only Ken can do something, not me, and not even this poll...

If people here want to be intelligent, we can speak of dozens of problems that we treat here without brain.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorscotthm
Registered: March 20, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United States Posts: 2,442
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting surfeur51:
Quote:
I say nothing. Rules ask to do that.

No they don't.  They say to use the CLT, not how to use it.

---------------
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorsurfeur51
Since July 3, 2003
Registered: March 29, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
France Posts: 4,439
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting scotthm:
Quote:
No they don't.  They say to use the CLT, not how to use it.


Credit Lookup main page :

"Enter the credited name exactly as per the credits to locate all profiles which contain that credit.

The results are counted once per profile regardless of the number of times in that profile the credit is listed in the cast and crew."

Everything is said. Nothing about new count due to filters.

Now, I'm tired to explain what is obvious to people who just want to violate rules because it is their preference.
See you in another thread...
 Last edited: by surfeur51
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorKathy
Registered: May 29, 2007
Reputation: Highest Rating
United States Posts: 3,378
Posted:
PM this userEmail this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting surfeur51:
Quote:


Now, I'm tired to explain what is obvious to people who just want to violate rules because it is their preference.


Or, it might be that people are basing their opinions on more than one small section of the rules - something Ken and invelos' has stated is an acceptable part of the contribution process.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorscotthm
Registered: March 20, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
United States Posts: 2,442
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting surfeur51:
Quote:
Credit Lookup main page :

"Enter the credited name exactly as per the credits to locate all profiles which contain that credit.

The results are counted once per profile regardless of the number of times in that profile the credit is listed in the cast and crew."

Everything is said. Nothing about new count due to filters.

1) This text you quote above is not part of The Rules but is from the Credit Lookup Tool page.

2) The first sentence (Enter the credited name exactly as per the credits to locate all profiles which contain that credit.) tells us what we must do.

3) The second sentence (The results are counted once per profile regardless of the number of times in that profile the credit is listed in the cast and crew.) tells us what the CLT does.

4) Nothing in the rules or the CLT tells us exactly how we must interpret the output of the CLT.

5) Thank you for your feedback.

---------------
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributoremmeli
www.myprofiler.de
Registered: June 26, 2013
Reputation: High Rating
Germany Posts: 676
Posted:
PM this userVisit this user's homepageView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting ateo357:
Quote:
Quoting Scooter1836:
Quote:

So yes, as far as Ken and the online database is concerned the filter shows he considers John Smith Jr / John Smith, Jr. / John Smith Jr. / and John Smith, Jr have equivalent common names.  So if Ken (the database owner) considers these names to have the common name it makes more sense to combine the counts.




No where in the rules or any posts that I have found has Ken stated that Filter = Common. It is a filtered name. It is you and the other 32 that have decided that filter and common mean the same thing. If you can not understand the difference between the 2 meanings of those words, I can't help you. The Rule uses the word standardization, to me that isn't the same as common.


+1


the real BirthYear OverView
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorAce_of_Sevens
Registered: December 10, 2007
Reputation: High Rating
Posts: 2,985
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
The rules aren't an end unto themselves. They're a tool for making sure the data entered is useful and consistent. We should keep that in mind when trying to figure out ambiguous cases.
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar Contributorsurfeur51
Since July 3, 2003
Registered: March 29, 2007
Reputation: Great Rating
France Posts: 4,439
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting Ace_of_Sevens:
Quote:
They're a tool for making sure the data entered is useful and consistent.

Sorry, but when rules ask us to create unexisting variants for names, they are a tool to make sure the data entered is useless and inconsistent. Same when they ask to recopy errors, with the result to unlink data and forbid to use correctly sorting and filtering functions.

The problem is that the majority here has voted for a strict application of rules in all cases, each of them having probably in mind a point for which he really prefered to use raw data.

Then, when those who voted to follow stupidly rules are in front of something they do not want to see, they try to find a way to reach what they want, and create polls to be allowed to violate what is written. This is not correct, and the only correct way is to discuss the problem in the Contribution Rules Committee, and wait for a change of rules, or a clarification, from Ken. In some cases, proposals that obtained a majority are still waiting after more than 4 years, and corresponding inconsistent data have proliferated. Probably Ken prefers chaos than consistence.
 Last edited: by surfeur51
DVD Profiler Unlimited RegistrantStar ContributorLewis_Prothero
Strength Through Unity
Registered: May 19, 2007
Reputation: Superior Rating
Germany Posts: 6,730
Posted:
PM this userView this user's DVD collectionDirect link to this postReply with quote
Quoting surfeur51
Quote:
At present time, we only can handle those data as each data that program limitations do not allow to contribute :
- necessary fake birth years

Correct, but what does this have to do with the OP?
Quote:
- profiles of different movies with same UPC

Wrong! And what does this have to do with the OP
Quote:
- two movies on same face of disc

Wrong! Again I somehow miss the relevance regarding the OP
Quote:
- headshots
- gallery photos

Correct. In fact the reason for this "Limitation" has been explained so often (hint: Copy-Right issues), that I hoped even the last could have understood. Seems I was wrong here.
It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?


Registrant since 05/22/2003
 Last edited: by Lewis_Prothero
    Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion Page: 1 2 3 4  Previous   Next