Quoting Jubal:

Quote:
I do not accept" it is because I say so" I don't like it on rare occassions when I have to do that, usually with regard to Studios but I do offer a detailed expplanation oy my own knowledge of studios, which is more than this user has done. The only person that I trust on Studios even more than myself is Unicus.

You or other users are not sources or documentation for studios, no matter how many words it takes you to describe your knowedge.

And I hope that Ken will revisit his decision because damage is being done to the database, that is guaranteed. How much remains to be seen  but based on what i have seen to date, the error rate could be as high as 10% of titles. It may be a little lower when I actually audit and verify the data, or it could be even higher than 10%, but globally changing what you don't own based on what you do IS a problem.  I won't do it, because I am aware of the problem, and I don't really care what ken says about it, I know the problem and i know it is wrong for the Community and the database and i care very much about both. Am I saying that user who hides behind Ken is not...in a word YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Skip

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
Quoting Dr. Killpatient:

Quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but Ken's stance on updating cast/crew on titles you did not own was if there was no cast/crew (or extremely basic) present.

Thus, updating the cast/crew of a profile you do not own when it already had seemingly full cast/crew data to make it match another profile is not valid and should be voted down.

The example you cite was but one example given. It wasn't all-inclusive or limited to that one example.

The recap he gave after a few posts:

Quoting Ken Cole:

Quote:

To recap:
- We do not (currently) prevent users from contributing or voting on profiles they don't own.
- If you are contributing to a profile that you don't own, our only requirement is that the notes submitted accurately reflect the source of the data, and state the specific profile used as the source.

I've read the thread many times and can't see where that overturns the earlier guidline

Quote:
In general, contributions should be made only for profiles which the contributor owns and can verify.  Similarly, contribution votes should be made only for profiles which the voter owns and can verify. 

However, there are exceptions.  Obviously, prerelease contributions do not require ownership.  They should be basic starter information (e.g. complete cast and crew is impossible to correctly contribute without having the disc).
Taking another case, if a particular locality has blank or limited cast info, and the submitter would like to fill it in with their verified cast from their own locality, I would tend to allow the voters who actually own the submitted locality to make the call.  However, the submitted contribution notes should clearly indicate that the cast is from the other locality, so that the voters and contribution evaluators can make an informed choice.

One additional reminder to please keep the contribution vote notes completely civil at all times.

If he no longer meant that Ken, of all people, could edit the earlier post. The 2 are not mutually exclusive unless you have a skewed agenda and want to read it to suit what you want. The General principal is Don't contribute to profiles you don't own. Then later it says we don't PREVENT you from. This does not mean the same as you should or even you can. It's a clear distinction. If he had meant it can I suggest he would have said that and saved bandwidth.

Quoting Graveworm:

Quote:
If he no longer meant that Ken, of all people, could edit the earlier post. The 2 are not mutually exclusive unless you have a skewed agenda and want to read it to suit what you want. The General principal is Don't contribute to profiles you don't own. Then later it says we don't PREVENT you from. This does not mean the same as you should or even you can. It's a clear distinction. If he had meant it can I suggest he would have said that and saved bandwidth.

The part I quoted does not overturn the one you quoted. It's a condensed version that is recapped into 2 main points. That's why I use that quote since it's easy to see where they stand. I have used those 2 points from the recap in my contributions and not had a decline, so I'm comfortable that my reading is not skewed.

To expand on what I said earlier, if I submitted a change to The Matrix saying that Neo was played Jonathan Levinson and for my source, cited Buffy the Vampire Slayer episode 4.17, "Superstar," everyone would vote no despite me citing a source and that the source does actually have the data I say (sort of). Clearly, the mere fact that someone cited a source doesn't obligate us to vote yes. Valid means we have a good reasn to believe the source is more accurate than existing data. I don't think other releases cut it in all circumstances.

Here are the notes from the last submission from T!M I gotr for High Fidelity:
K.K. Dodds and D.V. DeVincentis are credited without a space between the initials. Per Ken's instructions (and even an automated filter), these are entered as "D. V. DeVincentis [D.V. DeVincentis]" and "K. K. Dodds [K.K. Dodds]". Also added Naomi Donne, who's credited as Ms. Hjejle make-up artist, which, per the rules, qualifies for inclusion. Removed the "(DVDonly)" addition from Harold Ramis' role name. It's the DVD version we're profiling here, so I don't see what purpose it serves. I just watched the movie, and he indeed appears (uncredited) in it. There isn't anything else to it. Finally, according to the CLT, production designer Therese Deprez is actually more often credited with accents in her first name, as Thérèse DePrez. As such, this entry here needs the addition of that common name. CLT numbers: Thérèse DePrez: 29 titles (and 139 profiles), Therese DePrez: 14 titles (and 87 profiles).




To me, that is more than sufficient.

Quoting Jubal:

Quote:
I don't care what he claims his research to be or that he has checked the CLT, I want to see his results. It's HIS Contribution, it is HIS responsibility.

Yet you freaked out when I asked for a source when you tried to use your personal knowledge to list a media company that wasn't listed on the back cover. 

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
Quoting Jubal:

Quote:
I don't care what he claims his research to be or that he has checked the CLT, I want to see his results. It's HIS Contribution, it is HIS responsibility.

Yet you freaked out when I asked for a source when you tried to use your personal knowledge to list a media company that wasn't listed on the back cover. 

I didn't freak out, James. I stated correctly that i had provided far miore detailed comments than you were willing to accept from other users, I didn't say this in my notes but since you mentioned in few of  your inconsistencies your stand is hypocritical. If you demad more specific of one, then you cannot hold others to a less stringent standard. It gopes right up ther with your creating Rules which don't exist. Sorry, pal. You aren't correct.

Skip