Sorry, but I do not see the inconsistency.

The thread about titles has to do with style/formatting, not hard data.

Why do you insist on trying to push for correction of things like typos when this issue has been beaten to death more times than I care to recall?

Where there are "gray" areas in the Rules, it is not only logical but actually required that some common sense be used to determine the correct course of action.

That does not mean that common sense can be applied to ignore Rules which are crystal clear.

Please stop beating this poor dead horse! 

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:

The thread about titles has to do with style/formatting, not hard data.

For titles, it has been stated that we had to follow exactly the title on cover, except when characters could not be found on a keyboard. So, we get things like "T4xi", which is style/formatting coherent with the cover. In the other thread, it was decided to add spaces, which is style/formatting incoherent with the cover.

In one case, people argued that rules had to be followed exactly > T4xi
In another case, people violated the rule > added non existing spaces

If you do not see inconsistency...

People focused on typos about the change I proposed to the introduction of rules, but the aim was to allow marginal and documented interpretation of rules in case of odd situations. This problem is perhaps a dead horse, but it feeds most of this forum's discussions.

Quoting Berak:

Quote:
there are very few of the users who frequent the forums, and those who do not rely on the rules as they are written.

My problem is with users that speak only in hard data, that claim that C is c not ç, then explain that for them, a change of color is clearly a space. Imagine a title with a space between two words, and a change of color between those two names. Would they put two spaces arguing there is a change of color ?

My problem is also with people that ask to follow the rules but violate them. As for me, I do not like some of them but never contributed data which do not match with what is required.

You can verify yourself quite easily, surfeur. On just about any given title. To be fair it applies in some other localities as well, surfeur.  But all of this is terribly important. You want a linking system and then you do everything that you can to make that system cannot function.  I sit here and say that I can see the Francois issue, and i will support being able to use François as a documented Common name, largely for you as long as the credited As data is correct per the Credits not a you interpret it, Ken has to make that call not i, but i support you in that, I will NEVER go along with your premise relative to what you believe are typos, we match the data as it appears for Overviews and Cast and crew data. Typos as always are a local call, unless you are correcting a user-generated typo and there are plenty of those, Sometimes I wonder about the education level of those who are writing Overviews, apparent bad spelling and bad grammar, but it IS the data and we are NOT using user-generated Overviews, which is essentially what you are wanting to do.

Also you have to remember that we work on Ken's timeline not yours or mine. I support what you want relative to Francois but i cannot make that change, I believe that at some point ken will allow it, but it's on his schedule not ours and all we can do is sit back and be patient.The only thing I can do is follow where we are at any given point in time (which is always today), and support those changes which appear to have merit for tomorrow, and I can't make tomorrow come any faster than it will come.

If I have learned anything in the last ten years, it is that the user community is very predictable, I know about how long it will take the natives to get restless and start pounding drums for a new toy after the new release is out, for example. A lot of what we see from release to release has been achieved through patience, not through carping. There are things which i don't agree with that have been done that I will mention from time to time, but I am also aware that I do not possess all of the puzzle pieces only Ken does, I try hard to understand where he is at any given point in time. Some of the changes which, in my view, have been forced upon him are bad and have led to some of inconsistencies which do exist, fortunately they are few and far between. What we have to realize is that the filmmakers provide the data, while some of us believe that they know more than they do, they don't and they can't. Just as when we watch a given film, we could sit and discuss and debate the meaning of any given film, and usually any such debate resolves nothing, because how any individual views a film is right for that person and it could be entirely different from what the filmmaker was really trying to say,. I read a review, Yves, I go to the film and i say "Did that guy have any idea what he was watching", because I think his review was off the mark, that's my opinion and that opinion is no different from his, and neither may be correct according to what the filmmaker was trying to do. In the end if it were available, only the filmmaker's POV would be important, because he made it, but like any work of art it is usually left fro the viewer to create his own interpretation. We deal for the Program Online only with the facts (hard data), the interpretation is left to you in your local.

Skip

Skip