OK lets try and get this sorted one way or the other.
Should Group dividers used in the crew section have just the Company name Only or should it include the complete details

This is an example of where using the complete details adds context to the credit(s) under it


This is an example where the extended details do not add any context to the credits under it


One of the argument against using the extended details is the divider length but Ken has stated that you can abbreviate it to fit (I will include a option in the poll for divider length)

My own preference is for the extended details as this is the closes to the actual film credits but am happy to go either way, hopefully this will get it sorted one way or the other and Ken will take action to amend the rules

Would you propose to do the same (menaing include a divider with details) for e.g. costume designers and makeup artists, when they have been related to particular performers out of the whole cast?

Quoting ninehours:

Quote:

I believe he asked that because your sample credits included your own custom credits, which might be confusing the issue.

Extended details as long as it is used all the time.

I voted for company name only as I believe that's what the rule says.

If we were to ever allow for contribution of custom roles for all of our crew roles, I could see contributing all of the information for a divider. Otherwise, it seems odd to me to have 'as credited' dividers but not for crew roles.

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
I voted for company name only as I believe that's what the rule says.

If we were to ever allow for contribution of custom roles for all of our crew roles, I could see contributing all of the information for a divider. Otherwise, it seems odd to me to have 'as credited' dividers but not for crew roles.

I agree, that it seems odd, but I don't see that as a reason to not do it.  The system doesn't allow it for cast roles, which is unfortunate, but it can be done with dividers so I think it should be.

For those that are voting 'no', would any of you care to explain your reasons why?  Ken asked the same question in the Rules forum and the only person who gave an answer was James...though that might be because the thread was hijacked.  Anyway, I am just curious.

Quoting Corne:

Quote:
I voted Yes because dividers are giving context to the data. Just like I want the data to be complete I would like to see the context as complete possible. In the other topic concerning the extended info in group dividers I said I was in favour for company only but I've changed my mind because I think context adds more to the database.

Pretty much my feelings as well...right down to the changing of my mind.

We are still getting contributions removing the extended details from profiles, Ken posted here saying  he wanted more discussion on this before making a decision, well i would say everyone that has anything to say has said it so it's time to make a decision one way or the other