Quoting Alien Redrum:

Quote:
If we are looking for a "neutral ground", wouldn't it make the most sense to go 1//23 as opposed to 1/2/3 when it comes to "questionable" last names, assuming the link Martian posted is true, that only 25% of women move their maiden to the middle?

If these numbers are correct, it would make sense.

Quoting SpaceFreakMicha:

Quote:
If these numbers are correct, it would make sense.

Agreed!

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Quoting samuelrichardscott:

Quote:
If I remember, I'll phone the London office of the agency he's signed to tomorrow. So much easier.

This is getting more ridiculous by the minute - apparently we can't solve ANY parsing debate without contacting the person's agency...

If that is true, which I don't think it is, Tim. Then I have to ask the question, why is parsing so important. I think I know what the answer is going to be, but i will wait and see.

So...why is parsing so all-fired important?

Skip

I am probably alone in this... but I personally have a bit of a problem with a source that can't be checked by the voters or the screeners for that matter.

I agree with that. But on nearly every other source we can give, there will always be some that say this is not enough, we need more sources, mistake that was copied through the web, .... So perhaps it would be enough for the voters or screeners, but there will always be one or more which will have doubts. 

I could also live with some kind of democratic decisions, but this also won't work here. 

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
That is why I think not only do we need Invelos to make a rule on parsing (standard starting point of some kind) but also make a ruling on what THEY feel is adequate documentation.

Or indeed change the rules so that some documentation or sources are required at all if that is what they want. We often hear about it but the rules don't say that any documentation is required just an explanation. So Thomas Haden Church re-parsed as Haden Church is his double barralled surname is an explanation and ample notes for the rules.

Agree with the Martian

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
That is why I think not only do we need Invelos to make a rule on parsing (standard starting point of some kind) but also make a ruling on what THEY feel is adequate documentation.

Another time I can absolutely agree with you. 
This would be the best way to handle this and would help to stop many of this useless parsing thread with always the same conflicts. 

But I don't think this is a new problem, (Please correct me if I'm wrong) and nothing was made to change.
This is not a critism to Ken, Gerri or others involved at this great program and this website, doing a hard and really good job  , but as the database (even if it's user-based) is a big benefit and therefore also a sales pitch, in this case there should be more activity.

Til now it's not ruled how to handle this and "I can do whatever I want". Perhaps on a change the screeners will decline, but on an initial cast/crew contribution the chance to get approved is high, also without sources/explanation of your parsing. 

Stil hope name parsing will be ruled in a kind you explained.
... But if not, finding a way in the forum on which all users can agree won't work.
So why wasting time and energy to explain my ideas or thoghts in this thread:
http://www.invelos.com/Forums.aspx?task=viewtopic&topicID=426710
Sorry Kathy. 
But the idea of a "Accepted parsings" thread is good. But the problem is what is accepted.  ...by all! 

Quoting RHo:

Quote:
Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
Let us remember, please, that at the time HBC became an issue, it was myself that uncovered the idea of ufinding and using three "consecutive films" with ping-ponged data,

If I remember correctly, the last name of Mrs. Bonham Carter has been well documented for all but one user long before you have brought up your "three consecutive films" argument. For me the fact that she is the daughter of Raymond Bonham Carter has been more than enough documentation.

Following that logic, since George Herbert Walker Bush was the father of George Walker Bush, the 43rd President of the United States' last name must be "Walker Bush."

Except it isn't.  It's just "Bush."

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
Saying "Thomas Haden Church re-parsed as Haden Church is his double barralled surname" is indeed an explanation by definition as it clarifies what you are doing.

It doesn't calrify it for me.  As I said, I already know what is being done because I can see the color coded name.  In addition, I already know that he thinks it is his surname, which is all your 'explanation' says, otherwise he wouldn't be making the change.  A full explanation would be what I did for Lauren Shuler Donner...

"Parsing for Lauren Shuler Donner determined by credit that reads 'Assistants to Ms. Shuler Donner'."

That is an explanation.  It is also useful and descriptive, which the rules also require, your 'explanation' is neither.

Sam for me. As I have said based on what has been offered Church is the sole last name. The Library of Congress is far and away the most credible source reflecting the proper parsing and accodrding to them his name is CHURCH.

Skip