Author |
Message |
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 756 |
| Posted: | | | | UK Bluray of Phantom of the Opera 25th Anniversary Edition, 5-050582-860122. Look at the overview on the rear cover, fifth line. The cover shows "Inspired by the original staging by ince and Gillian Lynne," * Looks like a typo. Agreed? The overview in the online profile shows "Inspired by the original staging by Vince and Gillian Lynne," So what do we do with the online profile? Leave it as it is, so that it reads as if the original staging was done by Vince Lynne and Gillian Lynne? Or profile it in exactly as written, complete with typo? Thus replacing cr@p with more cr@p (albeit different cr@p ) Discuss! For those who are interested, it should read "Inspired by the original staging by Hal Prince and Gillian Lynne,". As can be found on the cover of the DVD version, 5-050582-860115 | | | Chris |
|
| Eagle | Registered: Oct 31, 2001 |
Registered: March 15, 2007 | Posts: 563 |
| Posted: | | | | The rules are quite clear on this. They state (bolding by me): "Copy the overview from the back of the DVD case exactly as written, including capitalization of words exactly as shown on the back of the case. Separate all paragraphs with a blank line."
Locally, I would correct the obvious typo. But for the main db, it must include the typo. | | | My phpDVDprofiler collection |
|
Registered: May 29, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 3,475 |
| Posted: | | | | This is one of the few issues that is quite clear and I don't see how it can be debated without a rule change or clarification from Ken. According to the "rules" the Overview is to entered, typos and all, as it is on the cover. So "ince" is what should be entered. But, no one is obligated to change or correct any data they don't want to. |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 4,596 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Mole: Quote:
Discuss!
Nothing to discuss. The rule for Overviews gives no wiggle room. "... exactly as written..." The Overview in the database must contain the error. What one does with their local is entirely up to them. | | | My WebGenDVD online Collection |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 17,334 |
| Posted: | | | | Agreed... the rules are completely clear on this subject. | | | Pete |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 13,202 |
| Posted: | | | | Indeed, the rules are quite clear. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever. There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom. Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand. The Centauri learned this lesson once. We will teach it to them again. Though it take a thousand years, we will be free. - Citizen G'Kar |
|
Registered: May 8, 2007 | Posts: 824 |
| Posted: | | | | Forum Moderator: No need for namecalling. | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." | | | Last edited: by Forum Moderator |
|
Registered: March 15, 2007 | Posts: 1,982 |
| Posted: | | | | The logic way would be to use the correct synopsis already approved from the DVD release (as cloning is perfectly acceptable by the rules even if I disagree with that practice, at least it won't add a stupid error in the database).
Without using the word of Grendell, I must say I agree that it is stupid to enter an error in the database because of a rule that make no sense. | | | Last edited: by Jimmy S |
|
Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 6,730 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Jimmy S: Quote: I must say I agree that it is stupid to enter an error in the database because of a rule that make no sense. The problem with correcting "obvious" typos is perfectly shown in the example Chris (Mole) kindly provided. We have a "well-meant" correction from "ince" to "Vince" which may look better but is nevertheless incorrect. So even if Grendell thinks of me as an idiot, when confronted with two incorrect options I'd always pick the one that is verifiable with the source every owner of the disc has: The Cover. All else is speculation not data. | | | 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 |
|
Registered: May 20, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 2,934 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Jimmy S: Quote: The logic way would be to use the correct synopsis already approved from the DVD release (as cloning is perfectly acceptable by the rules even if I disagree with that practice, at least it won't add a stupid error in the database).
Without using the word of Grendell, I must say I agree that it is stupid to enter an error in the database because of a rule that make no sense. For the online, we profile dvd/hd/bd and there associated packaging. We do not profile movies. So we copy the data exactly as presented on the packaging/discs (typos and all). If locally you want to alter the program to be a Movie Profiler (which many seem to want to do), then that is your option. Quoting Grendell Quote: Forum Moderator: Removed quote This tone is condescending, and is not necessary Charlie. | | | Last edited: by Forum Moderator |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 17,334 |
| Posted: | | | | I agree... as long as a release has an overview on the case to use... it must be used for that profile. Warts and all. | | | Pete |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Posts: 756 |
| Posted: | | | | I very carefully worded my initial post, because I recently submitted that very change. My notes were somewhat pointed but accurate: "Corrected Overview to be exactly as written. "...original staging by Vince and Gillian Lynne..." changed to "...original staging by ince and Gillian Lynne...". (including what appears to be a double space, before ince) This is one of the times when we knowingly put crap into the database, because the rules state "Copy the overview from the back of the DVD case exactly as written". For those of us who wish to have meaningful data in our LOCAL databases, the text should read "...original staging by Hal Prince and Gillian Lynne..." as can be found on the DVD version 5 050582 860115. " It received one NO vote and was subsequently declined. Discuss further | | | Chris | | | Last edited: by Mole |
|
Registered: March 14, 2007 | Posts: 5,734 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Mole: Quote: Discuss further Copy the text. No fictitiousness. | | | Don't confuse while the film is playing with when the film is played. [Ken Cole, DVD Profiler Architect] |
|
Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 17,334 |
| Posted: | | | | That just sounds like the screener made a simple mistake. No more then that. What I usually do with the ones that looks like a mistake is open a support ticket. And from there they usually do one of two things... push it on through anyway or tell me to resubmit it. | | | Pete |
|
Registered: March 20, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 2,851 |
| Posted: | | | | Quoting Addicted2DVD: Quote: That just sounds like the screener made a simple mistake. No more then that. What I usually do with the ones that looks like a mistake is open a support ticket. Way too much trouble. I used to do things like that until it became clear that I was more concerned about the content of the database than those in charge of it. That's no longer the case. --------------- |
|
Registered: May 29, 2007 | Reputation: | Posts: 3,475 |
| Posted: | | | | I have never sent a support ticket but, if one of my profiles is mistakenly declined, I resubmit it and outline why I feel the screeners made a mistake.
I don't think I've ever had one of these profiles declined a second time. |
|