| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | To be precise this data has been around since the week of release nearly FIVE years ago, AESP. Skip  | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Prof. Kingsfield: Quote:
To be precise this data has been around since the week of release nearly FIVE years ago, AESP.
Skip To be precise, I am not addressing this particular case. Some people believe that Ken had said certain data is untouchable. All I did was set the record straight. I do not own this title, so have no opinion on the validity of the data. | | | 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: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting TheMadMartian: Quote:
Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:
Quote:
To be precise this data has been around since the week of release nearly FIVE years ago, AESP.
Skip
To be precise, I am not addressing this particular case. Some people believe that Ken had said certain data is untouchable. All I did was set the record straight. I do not own this title, so have no opinion on the validity of the data. I do know the history of it, I even know of the origin of the data. As i explained the details, i don't care a user (not me) spent many hours inputting the data into the database back before their was any prohibition on the source or before we had Rules. There is a lot gold in that thar data. As I also said I supported the idea summarily replacing the data and Ken went the other way on it. I support Ken on this since it is what he wanted and i would hate to see many hours of work just thrown out because some other user considers it ridiculous. If you were the user, my friend, i would defend your labor investment or anyone else's just as strenuously. This argument is what is is ridiculous. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: April 7, 2007 |  Posts: 357 |
| | Posted: | | | | If you want to change data should you not at least try and see if it's correct? The burden of proof in changes is always on the contributor and it should be for each cast change so I would expect an entry for each removal.
If you remove all of those in the belief that some may be inaccurate then, as has been said, you will lose some real nuggets, some of them are definitely in there and are easy to verify. Losing good data is as bad and probably worse than allowing bad data to remain. In this case it's highly likely that most of the uncredited are in the movie so why remove them? | | | | Last edited: by Graveworm |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | Graveworm... Not according to Ken. Quoting Ken Cole:Quote:
Uncredited should only be removed where they are a match with a third party database. Note that they do not have to be an exact match. If they are a close match with any third party database, and there is no listed justification, it's safe to remove them. So no... all you have to do is show that it is a close match to any 3rd party database and that there is no justification in the past notes. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: September 30, 2008 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 1,805 |
| | Posted: | | | | I removed these credits in my local a long time ago (from the Canadian profile... which I'm not entirely sure actually needs to be there, but it is, so I cleaned up parts of the profile awhile ago). If you want to remove 'em from the Canadian locality... you'd have my vote.  I've actually been meaning to go back and find these nuggets and add 'em back in, just haven't had the time to search through 1200 names... | | | | The night is calling. And it whispers to me soflty come and play. |
|
| Registered: April 7, 2007 | | Posts: 357 |
| | Posted: | | | | Good point but that is not in the rules and the rules still say that voting should be based on changing bad data in accordance with the rules there is no mention of statements in the forums. In this case I could easily fill 10 No votes with timings of uncredited cast so I could happily vote No on the basis that it would remove good data.
My point was not about the rules or what you can do it was about what is the point of removing so much good data on the basis some might be wrong. Unless you want to up your contribution count. I am not a fan of "You can always keep it in your local" which often gets spoounted here but it would be easy to remove all the uncredited locally if that as not your thing but adding uncredited is always going to be a difficult job once it has gone. | | | | Last edited: by Graveworm |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | I personally don't remove uncredited. Not from the main database... and not from my local. No matter if the person is a complete unknown with nothing else ever done or if it is some of the biggest super stars in the business.
what you are asking now... that is basically up to every individual contributor on how they want to do it whether we agree with that or not... that is if they do it per Ken's clarification.
But the way you previously asked it, it sounded like you were asking if they could do it per the rules... going by Ken's clarification as long as they are not previously justified and they are a close match to a 3rd party database... well then that answer is yes... they can do it. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 868 |
| | Posted: | | | | Maybe it's me but i find it hard to belive someone know /recognizes over 1200 virtually unknown extras. I randomly clicked on several names and most didn't have more than 1 or 2 uncredited appearances (on imdb) or maybe a part on a TV episode.
I'm sure there are several interseting people also included but i'm pretty sure the majority could be removed.
BTW i don't own this movie so i don't really care either way.
Paul |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Good grief. Verything has to be a controversy and drama quuen city. You can't just leave something alone. I hqave no doubt that if one of YOU ( and like I said it wasn't me) had spent the time entering that data the hard way that the original Contributor spent, you would probably be very unappreciative of people in this conversation. You all make me sick to my stomach, it is simply unbelievable. @ Merrik And it was exactly your comment that concerned Ken the most about removing valuable data. Who would pick up the ball and bring it back documented...not I and apparently not you. Skip  | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 868 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Prof. Kingsfield: Quote:
Good grief.
Skip Was this aimed at me? I clicked on about 20-30 names. Only going through a-d of the uncredited, alphabized cast and nearly all of them only had 1 or a couple uncredited roles and some had one or two appearances on a TV show, most probably not even available on DVD. How could you possibly recognize these?! Again, personally i don't care if they are present as i don't own this movie but it seems very unlikely you'd recognize, by name and face, over 1200 people of which a lot don't have more than several uncredited appearances! Paul |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | No paul, not at YOU, at everybody. If just once everybody would show some understanding and just oh OK, I would pass out and probably have a coronary out of sheer happiness. But not here, everythingg has to be controversy, and if you think that this is the first time this film has been discussed in terms of (uncredited)....guess again. There is nothing here that is EVER new. Sheesh Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 868 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Prof. Kingsfield: Quote:
No paul, not at YOU, at everybody.
If just once everybody would show some understanding and just oh OK, I would pass out and probably have a coronary out of sheer happiness. But not here, everythingg has to be controversy, and if you think that this is the first time this film has been discussed in terms of (uncredited)....guess again. There is nothing here that is EVER new.
Skip But i'm trying too understand, i just can't. As i explained before. I'm sure there are some very interesting people in this list than will go on to achive great things. I just can't undertsnad how you could know and recognize over 1200 virtually unkowns with no more than several uncredited appearances. Again, i don't own this title so personally i don't care. And in no way this is meant as critisism to you Skip. But i just find it very unlikely. (BTW: I know you didn't create this profile, and understand the desire to keep interesting uncredited appearances but the majority doesn't seem to be very interseting with only some tv appearances and a couple of uncredited movie roles. Paul |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | I personally can understand what you are saying Skip. As I said... if I owned this movie I would have the uncredited locally and I wouldn't attempt to remove it myself.
All I personally was showing is per Ken (and strictly per Ken) all that is required to remove uncredited cast... whether I agree with it or not. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting paulb_99: Quote:
Quoting Prof. Kingsfield:
Quote:
No paul, not at YOU, at everybody.
If just once everybody would show some understanding and just oh OK, I would pass out and probably have a coronary out of sheer happiness. But not here, everythingg has to be controversy, and if you think that this is the first time this film has been discussed in terms of (uncredited)....guess again. There is nothing here that is EVER new.
Skip
[b]
But i'm trying too understand, i just can't. As i explained before. I'm sure there are some very interesting people in this list than will go on to achive great things. I just can't undertsnad how you could know and recognize over 1200 virtually unkowns with no more than several uncredited appearances.[/b]
Again, i don't own this title so personally i don't care. And in no way this is meant as critisism to you Skip. But i just find it very unlikely. (BTW: I know you didn't create this profile, and understand the desire to keep interesting uncredited appearances but the majority doesn't seem to be very interseting with only some tv appearances and a couple of uncredited movie roles.
Paul Not that it's really relevant, I haven't reviewed the entire list. But you would be surprise just how many people I do recognize from just a picture, I would guess several thousand and probably some that you would not have a clue who they were, like Kathleen Freeman a very well-known character actress, just mentioning her name brings up a mental picture. But so what show a little appreciation and gratitude for the work that was done by another user . Would we do it today, oh hell no. If it is ever released to Blu-Ray I will vote against cloning of that dataset, but I will also vote against summary removal for all of the reasons I have mentioned and I do not understand why everything here has to be many pages, arguments which leave bitter feelings, discussions which have been had before but let's have another one and so forth. Is it really necessary. Twenty pages here we come. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: September 30, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,805 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Prof. Kingsfield: Quote:
@ Merrik
And it was exactly your comment that concerned Ken the most about removing valuable data. Who would pick up the ball and bring it back documented...not I and apparently not you.
Skip Oh don't get all dramatic on me Skip.  I removed them from my local, and simply haven't added back in the nuggets because of a lack of time (between school, my practicum, my family, my friends and my personal life, searching through 1200 names to find the ones I personally want to add back in isn't that high on a priority list for me). What I do in my own local for some films doesn't even come close to reflecting what I will or won't do when submitting to the system. I 100% appreciate the effort it took to get those names there if done properly, but what I like in my local, and what I submit to the system, are completely different sometimes. IF I were to ever undertake a task like this to submit to the system, you can be 100% assured I would go about it in a completely and utterly different matter. All I do with my submissions are pick up the ball, or keep it rolling, as it were. So yes, I would in fact, take the time to bring them back documented. So no need for the eye rolling my friend, unless you know the whole story.  | | | | The night is calling. And it whispers to me soflty come and play. |
|