I have always been for a one name field. Unfortunately Ken is against it (on his last mention of it) so don't look like we will be getting that one. 

Quoting samuelrichardscott:

Quote:
Personally I would never have a reason to use the parsings.

Unless you where insulting Scotland's ability to govern it's own affairs 

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Parsing really only has brought us pointless multiple, non-linking entries for virtually EVERY name in the database consisting of more than two parts.

And even for some with ONLY two parts! (stage names)

Quoting Dr. Killpatient:

Quote:
How does one sort by name?  The cast list is in the order credited....

Got me. I was going to ask the same question.

The only time I could see parsing being helpful, and someone please correct me if there's an easier way of doing this...

When I'm entering a dvd from scratch or re-doing a cast or crew entry, I type in the first letter of the first name, and a couple letters of the last name. The system filters these results, and I'm able to see if there's a bunch of variants in my local for which I'm then able to try and find a common name.

However, I'm assuming this would stay the case if there was no parsing at all, so then again, I'm not entirely sure how it actually is helpful... 

This reminds me... I need to fix a bunch of friggin' entries in my local for Philip Baker Hall... 

The program allows us to choose between "first middle last" or "last, first middle" as display options for names.

Also, when choosing a name to assign to a cast or crew role in a profile, the names are sorted by last name.

Both of the above behaviors would be changed by a one-field name.

One of the things I like about the current name lookup is that you can type in characters of the first name and characters of the last name to quickly filter down the selection options. For instance, typing "c east" will get you close to Clint Eastwood. I guess that's not many keystrokes different than "Clint E", but I tend to use that frequently.

I think the choice of eliminating certain functionalities from the program for everyone in favor of keeping a dozen or so of us from arguing about parsing isn't as clear cut as it would seem to those of us having the argument. 

Quoting Graveworm:

Quote:
I am not against anything that works but how would one field improve linking surely it would make matters worse?

You wouldn't have to worry if the correct name is Helena//Bonham//Carter or Helena// //Bonham Carter as it would all be entered in one field called "Name" or similar.

Just to say that I quite like the idea of parsing but can see why some don't. So I'll just repeat what's been said some months ago - Make parsing a local feature. The basic info will be available to everyone and then those who want to set up First//Middle//Last can do so as they want. I think it would also help with Asian names that don't follow the Western standard.

Quoting Kinoniki:

Quote:
You would not have to remove the parsing ability from the program, just allow the linking feature to ignore it when looking at a name and treat it as a single name field.

Not sure how easy that would be to implement, but that sounds like a good solution to me! 

Keep the current system, just have parsing ignored when pulling up an actor/actress's name. Sounds like, if this were possible, it would keep both crowds happy. Those who want to sort by last name still could. Those who want to have correct linking regardless of how the name was entered still would.