Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
No, actually I only argued that I did not believe the specific Rule you cited could not be applied, because the contributor was not replacing data, but was removing data.  I never stated or implied that other Rules could or could not be brought to bear.

But, enough.

Now you're just playing semantics so, yea, enough. 

I would have though a true parser would appreciate the logic of Hal's argument.

Quoting pauls42:

Quote:
The reason we have more than 1 person is so that the value of the change (and not just whether it follows the rules) can be indicated by those who have voted..

If this were the case, then we wouldn't need the rules at all...just a bunch of people deciding whether or not the change has value.  All contributions must adhere to the rules.  If a contribution does, no matter how you spin it, you can't vote 'no'.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
The contributor is following the Contribution Rules,

Not really. His contribution does not add any value at all. And it certainly doesn't add significant value. The only way his contribution can be valid is if the old profile is in violation of the rules.

Quote:
his data is accurate and it replaces data which violates the Contribution Rules.

I'm not so sure I agree with this.

I mean - sure, if the old profile is in violation with the rules, then this new profile should be accepted. However, I haven't found anything in the rules that says that you can't list the shorts that are included on a DVD compilation of shorts films.

The only items the rules states are forbidden in the overview section are: Taglines, reviews, extra features, hyperlinks or other HTML, and line break hyphens.

The rules also states that a track listing for concerts or music DVDs are OK, but there's nothing to suggest that this is a complete list of release types that are allowed a list of content. Indeed, in the TV series section, there's a clarification that states that a list of episodes is OK, but that synopsises are not OK. Again, there's no indication that TV series are an exception to a general rule that no content lists are allowed.

I will argue that the common denominator between all release types that explicitly allow content listing in the overview, are that they all contain multiple features of equal importance, where none can be considered the "main" feature. This is also the case for short film compilations.

I will also argue that a collection of theatrical shorts can be considered a box set. The rules says that a box set is "any release that includes more than one film". A theatrical short film is also a film, and a compilation includes more than one of them. Creating a separate profile for each short is obviously overkill, but the overview clarification for box sets allows "an itemized listing of the contents only, without descriptions", and that is exactly what the Disney collections have.

Finally, I think that community consensus should count for something here. I have about fifty cartoon compilations, released over the last 8 or 9 years, on my shelf. All of them include a listing of contents in the overview. If every single one of these has been accepted through the regular voting procedure, then I'll argue that the community does not think that these content listings are in violation of the rules. If there needs to be issued a clarification to the rules, just to state explicitly that these listings are OK, then that's fine, but I think the current rules allow them already.

If this were the case,, wouldn't we be  adding the same overview paragraph(s) that would also be there in French ??

Main question is why this rule cannot simply be changed to cover this eventuality, and allow useful information. 
We need a mechanism to make such changes, rather than a mechanism to argue about this for weeks.
It's not as if this necessitates massive changes to the program or the database. 

actually 83% voted in favor of keeping the extra overviews that were not included on the back cover of (i.e.) Mickey Mouse in Living Color (classic uncensored compilation of shorts from 1935 to 1938 ), Therefore showing us that the voting is in, ,and indeed the approval panel ( or Invelos) will not sway from this type of vote and therefore by  its own rules:  ' When there is no overview on the case, add a simple, self-written overview of 1-2 paragraphs. Do not include spoilers and always match the overview language to the profile's locality. ' 

therefor this thread should be  done and finished ..

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
It doesn't matter what 83% of the voters want.  If they wanted IMDb data, would that be o.k.? 

Beyond that, are you saying that the contributions were declined?

no one here in the 83% bracket would ever vote to keep IMDB data.

&  No only 17% agree to remove.. a whooping 83% said NO .. to removal...

I have a simple question (to which I doubt that there is one simple answer): if, in box sets, we can, by the rules, add to the overview a listing of the films or shows in the sets, why does is mean that these sets with many short films and TV episodes must have their listings removed? Some of these are multi disc sets of animated shorts, others are multi disc sets of TV shows. It seems that in either case that it does not break the rules to add to the overview a simple list of the shorts or shows.