| Author |
Message |
| Registered: July 18, 2010 | | Posts: 6 |
| | Posted: | | | | Can someone please explain to me how to set up a Box Set. The Box has a UPS code but the discs (in keep cases) do not. I can not find a way to add a disc without a UPS code?
I searched the forums and FAQ sheets and could find nothing. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,741 |
| | Posted: | | | | UPC, not UPS  (Universal Product Code) You can add the discs by inserting them in your computer DVD drive. Then open the "Add" dialog and switch to "By inserted disc". If you're in luck there will be profiles for them already. Then you open the parent profile for editing (double-click on the list) and switch to the tab "Box Set Contents". There you can add them to the profile as children. | | | Karsten
DVD Collectors Online
 |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 115 |
| | Posted: | | | | Not related to question, but ... This is a cool example for box set parent profile   Screenshot imageLets see how voting affects to the minds of approving person.  Trinitron is back.  | | | | Last edited: by JaLe |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 17,330 |
| | Posted: | | | | Actually JaLe If I had that I would vote no as well. Your change to the production year is wrong. You changed it to 2010... and the rules for boxset says... Rules Quote: Quote:
Production Year for a Box Set should be the year of the earliest feature release in the set. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 115 |
| | Posted: | | | | One item out of 17 is wrong and you vote NO, interesting.
If I had to vote in similar case, I would vote YES and add note for approving person about wrong year.
But that is just me. |
|
| Registered: May 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,475 |
| | Posted: | | | | If there is small mistake out out of a much larger contribution I send a pm to the contributor explaining what needs to be fixed and why.
Almost without exception the contributor fixes the mistake and I then vote accordingly. | | | | Last edited: by Kathy |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,330 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting JaLe: Quote:
One item out of 17 is wrong and you vote NO, interesting.
If I had to vote in similar case, I would vote YES and add note for approving person about wrong year.
But that is just me. Yes.. that has always been my policy... if there is something wrong per the rules it would get a no vote with reason. I don't vote yes with reason as I know not everyone (myself included) do not always look at votes when all they get is yes votes. I never know who are the same way. It also makes it so it can't be missed by the screener (then they can decide if it is reason enough to reject or let go through). Just because it has a no vote (correct or not) don't mean it will not go through anyway. Though I do agree that Trinitron's reason for the no vote is wrong... I do believe because of the error it deserves a no vote. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: May 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,475 |
| | Posted: | | | | There is a post - sorry I searched and couldn't find it - that states that a contribution that contributes a lot of information will not be rejected because of a small error.
But if there is an error and it is pointed out by the voters, it is much better to fix it now instead of waiting for someone else to do it in the future. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,330 |
| | Posted: | | | | I believe this is the post you are talking about Kathy... Quoting Ken Cole:Quote:
The Invelos evaluators' standing policy is to accept profiles that add significant value. They do not have to be complete, nor even completely accurate. If you're submitting 50 painstakingly correct cast entries but get the production year wrong, the profile should be accepted and corrected later.
"No" votes are equally valid in this case, however. They allow the contributor a chance to correct their submission if they choose, and save someone the effort of the correction later on.
I've sent out a notes reiterating this policy to the evaluators. And I would also say to take note that He does say no voting (with reason of course) is equally as valid as yes votes with reason. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: October 6, 2008 | | Posts: 1,932 |
| | Posted: | | | | I think it is very unfortunate that a contribution evaluator met with the submission being discussed has to either approve a submission that changes correct information to incorrect, or to disapprove the entire submission. It is very inefficient, wasting the time of the evaluator, the submitter and voters because further submission will be necessitated, regardless of the choice made. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,330 |
| | Posted: | | | | definitely agree with you there. But I do understand it would slow down the screening process quite a bit I wonder if it wouldn't be worth it in the long run. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting JaLe: Quote:
One item out of 17 is wrong and you vote NO, interesting.
If I had to vote in similar case, I would vote YES and add note for approving person about wrong year.
But that is just me. Sorry of having to correct you: The list of obvious errors and mistakes: - incorrect boxset title ("Shrek" is not on the cover) - Production Year (as explained by Pete) - removal of valid data: Genre - undocumented change of Regions - undocumented change of Release Date - undocumented change of SRP Without owning the boxset I cannot say too much about the quality of the scans, but they seem a bit too red and have lost some sharpness compared to the existing scans. So yes I would have voted "No" too, but would have sent you a PM to explain my reasons, hoping that you would have corrected your submission. | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 |
|
| Registered: May 9, 2007 |  Posts: 1,536 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting CalebAndCo: Quote:
I think it is very unfortunate that a contribution evaluator met with the submission being discussed has to either approve a submission that changes correct information to incorrect, or to disapprove the entire submission. It is very inefficient, wasting the time of the evaluator, the submitter and voters because further submission will be necessitated, regardless of the choice made. At least the screeners can decide to approve independently the data and the cover scans. And it would not appear too complicated to let them approve individual sections, in the same manner that we as users can do when downloading updates. | | | | Hans |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 115 |
| | Posted: | | | | I'm very pleased that all of you have spotted the true essence of my example contribution for boxset parent profile.
Please tap few times on your own shoulder and congratulate yourself.
I'll even offer you an pint of virtual beer. |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting JaLe: Quote:
I'm very pleased that all of you have spotted the true essence of my example contribution for boxset parent profile.
Please tap few times on your own shoulder and congratulate yourself.
I'll even offer you an pint of virtual beer. No sarcasm needed, while I actually have spotted the essence of your contribution and agree with it, I don't see any sense in replacing one error by another. My post wasn't meant as attack, but as a distinct hint that in fact there are reasons to vote "No" on your contribution. Probably (but not very likely) Trinitron even meant the incorrect removal of the genre with his "No". In general (with some exceptions) a "No" is not meant disdainful, but is the opportunity for the contributor to improve his contribution. I admit though, that sometimes I have difficulties in seeing it that way too.  | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 |
|
| Registered: July 18, 2010 | | Posts: 6 |
| | Posted: | | | | Thanks All - very interesting discussion - but a bit above my user leverl. I think another point of confusion for me was the difference between a boxed set ( a set of titles boxed together ) like Shrek 1-?? or Star Wars sets, and a set of disks that are a series such as TV seasons. One is a set of related titles, the other is a set of "discs" that have the same title, and thus are not a boxed set. In the TV season case you are adding discs to a single title, while a boxed set is a bunch of related titles??? I found this a little confusing at first. I assume the disc set has a single UPC code while a box set has several??? Thanks again all for your help.  |
|