"Sound Editorial" Smack in the middle of the sound section between Sound Designer and Re-recording.

I'm leaning towards no as they could be sound effects editors or foley editors, but there are no other sound credits to be seen...
2 of the 4 names I have for multiple other sound credits.
Existing profile has none of them, but is a super-rare and niche title (Soroity House Massacre).

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
I'd definitely include them, yes.

As what?

I think just "Sound" or "Supervising Sound Editor" could match.


It's not listed in the credit chart, so I would leave them out.

Quoting VirusPil:

Quote:
Quoting T!M:

Quote:
I'd definitely include them, yes.

As what?

You don't see the word "sound editor" in "sound editorial"? That's what it is. Similarly, I've always included "sound editing" and "sound editing by". "Sound editorial" is the exact same thing.

It continues to baffle me how some users always seem to be looking for far-fetched excuses to keep valid data from the database. By that very same reasoning, one could argue that each and every time a production designer is credited as "production designed by", he cannot be entered: after all, "production designed by" is not listed in the crew chart, now is it? Yet nobody seems to have a problem with entering them - and rightly so. This is no different.

Quoting bigdaddyhorse:

Quote:
"Sound Editorial" Smack in the middle of the sound section between Sound Designer and Re-recording.

I'm leaning towards no as they could be sound effects editors or foley editors, but there are no other sound credits to be seen...
2 of the 4 names I have for multiple other sound credits.
Existing profile has none of them, but is a super-rare and niche title (Soroity House Massacre).

Huh? Of course. Unless as Gard said, then i would ignore it.

But then there is the issue of Robotics Special Effects Supervisor.

Skip

We'll agree to disagree.

Skip

Quoting VirusPil:

Quote:
Sound Editors are editing the sound. Editorials are people talking about this.

I'm sorry, but no. They're sound editors.

Quoting VirusPil:

Quote:
Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Quoting VirusPil:

Quote:
Sound Editors are editing the sound. Editorials are people talking about this.

I'm sorry, but no. They're sound editors.

Sure?    Then my translation program did me wrong. 

"Editorials" are articles written by editors (usually quite opinionated), normally at the beginning of a printed volume (newspaper, magazine, etc.)
Using it in such a context ("Sound Editorials") is pretty nonsensical, unless they wrote (or presented in another form) some personally opinionated piece of material to promote a perspective prior to watching a film (such as a Director's introduction, et cetera).
Either way, since (by definition of the word) an Editor delivers an Editorial, so they must also be "Sound Editors" 

But I agree [personal opinion, of course] that I would only include them if no other specific "Sound Editor" is credited.

Quoting VirusPil:

Quote:
I still would not include them as not listed in the credit chart. (alos just my personnel opinion)

Would you, by that same reasoning, also leave out "production designed by"? That's not listed in the chart either, yet it's obviously what we're after. The same applies to sound editorial <--> sound editor(s).