I tried to edit the overview of The World is Not Enough (UPC 883904-137566) from this:

Quote:
The World Is Not Enough is an exhilarating but sophisticated, action-packed adventure. Pierce Brosnan returns as Bond, charged to protect a gorgeous billionaire heiress (Sophie Marceau) from the ruthless hands of a nuclear-obsessed terrorist Renard (Robert Carlyle), who wants control of the world’s petroleum supply.

to this:

Quote:
The World Is Not Enough is an exhilarating but sophisticated, action-packed adventure. Pierce Brosnan returns as Bond, charged to protect a gorgeous billionaire heiress (Sophie Marceau) from the ruthless hands of a nuclear-obsessed terrorist Renard (Robert Carlyle), who wants control of the world’s petroleum supply.

But was told the first version was correct because that's the way it appeared on the cover.

However, only one of the other titles from that series, The Man with the Golden Gun, appears that way in the database.

The other Bond movies from that series do not bother to follow the formatting from the slipcover (i.e text is not italicized).

If we're going to be ridiculously OCD about following the formatting on the cover, shouldn't we also be consistent?

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting aintnosin:

Quote:
If we're going to be ridiculously OCD about following the formatting on the cover, shouldn't we also be consistent?

Yes, but we do this by correcting the ones that do not follow the rules, not by changing the one that does.

Ugh.    Do you really think he is trying to submit something against the rules? 

Instead of your post, why not explain to him that what he was posting was against the rules.  It doesn't help that there are an abundance of submissions that get added to the database that shouldn't have been approved.  So as a new contributor (he has 27 approved profile contributions at the time of this post) they look at what is in the approved database and tries to figure out what is the correct method.  They came here SEEKING HELP!!!!  Why not point him in the right direction rather then take the approach you did?  Don't you want to encourage people to contribute and help make the online database the best it can be? 

I hate the kind of attitude you displayed in your post.  From posting in other forums this is a reason given by many why they not only don't like the contributing to the database; but buying a license for the program.  Newbies are treated with contempt.  Instead of encouraging and helping them, we get comments such as yours.  While not outright offensive, if I were the OP or anyone else considering contributing for the first time I would your post off putting.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:

Based on his post, yes, he tried to submit something that was against the rules and, again based on his post, was told why it was against the rules.  I didn't say he did it on purpose, but he did do it.

But did yo take the time to see if he was a new contributor? No, you did not.  You just said they were doing it wrong by criticizing them.


Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Maybe you should ask yourself the same question.  Instead of ragging on me, why didn't you just give him the explanation you feel I should have given him?  Why not point him in the right direction rather than taking the approach you did?  Don't you want to encourage people to contribute and help make the online database the best it can be or is it more important for you to jump all over me?

Why didn't i give him the answer?  To be honest when I first read his query I wasn't a 100% what the correct answer was.  It made me curious myself.  If an entire overview was in italics except for one part... should it be reversed?  I can see the logic, but I was not sure of the rules.  So to answer your question I wouldn't answer him unless I felt I was giving him a helpful answer.  Do you really think your answer was useful to him as a new contributor in anyway?


Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:

He was treated with contempt?  Please, don't make me laugh.  If anything, he treated us with contempt with his "ridiculously OCD" comment.  As for your hating the kind of attitude I displayed in my post, well, since you chastised me for not being helpful then failed to be helpful yourself, you might want to take a look at your own attitude.  At least I answered the question.  What did you do to help?  Oh, that's right, not a damned thing. 

Thank you.  You really displayed your true colors here.  They are frustrated because there isn't much help or guidance for new users.  I have no contempt for new users, only for those know-it-alls that go out of their way not to help newcomers.

Quoting DoubleDownAgain:

Quote:
Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
Quoting aintnosin:

Quote:
If we're going to be ridiculously OCD about following the formatting on the cover, shouldn't we also be consistent?

Yes, but we do this by correcting the ones that do not follow the rules, not by changing the one that does.

I challenge yo to take a step back and re-read this.  If you were trying to contribute his overview for the first time... and you were confused because there were multiple differing profiles.  So you post a question on the forums.

How would you take the response you posted on a scale from 1-10?

1 being the least helpful, 10 being the most.

You are being kind of harsh.  While his response may not have been as helpful or as complete as you would desire, his response was in fact accurate.  It was just very direct.

I looked at the profile that is in the online DB, and the change he was proposing was in fact wrong.  The existing information is correct as it is in the DB.

To the op, yes we strive to be consistent, but our consistency comes from coping what is on the cover, not what is consistent from release to release.  While you may want it to appear the same in your DB (Which you can do locally, just do not contribute you version of the overview), for the online db you must follow the rules for the overview which can be found here

Quoting the Rules

Quote:
Copy the overview from the back of the DVD case exactly as written, including capitalization of words exactly as shown on the back of the case. Separate all paragraphs with a blank line.

Use the Bold and/or Italic features for any words in the overview that are bold and/or italic as needed to match the case. Exceptions: If the entire overview uses an uppercase or lowercase font, enter the overview using standard capitalization rules for the locality of the DVD. Do not bold or italicize individual letters (as in the case of dropped capitals beginning a paragraph).

Also, the overview in the online always comes from teh earliest release (at least till Profiler 3.9 is released)

Charlie

Quoting DoubleDownAgain:

Quote:
They are frustrated because there isn't much help or guidance for new users.  I have no contempt for new users, only for those know-it-alls that go out of their way not to help newcomers.

Reading the above exchange, I am reminded of a saying we use in the teaching world:

There are no stupid questions, only arrogant answers.

to you DDA, I wish there were more like you in these forums.

Quoting CharlieM:

Quote:


I have not looked at the other releases, of the other bond films in the that release series.  If the other are wrong in the formatting of the overview, then they need to be corrected.  Just because the others are formatted in the wrong way, does not justify the contribution that changes a correct formatting to an incorrect one. 

What I mean is that the ones who own more profiles in that series are not justified to vote no before they correct the other ones. Thats my opinion in this case. Voting no to this but at the same time allow it in other profiles, is not consistent.

Quote:
If he has others in the series, then he should submit the contributions correcting the formatting on the others.

No. I don't think he should do anything. I think the ones who votes no should correct the formatting on the other profiles. If not, they should allow this contribution (at least they should not vote no).

Quote:
While you may not agree with "striving for consistency", there are a number of contributors that do try to follow the "copy exactly" principle espoused in the rules.  There are still a lot of profiles out there that were contributed prior to the inclusion of italics in the profile, and there is no rule that says you must contribute formatting.

There is no rule that says you must vote either.

Quoting myself:

Quote:
And you can see that many of the same people who voted no also own these profiles. They have contributed to the profiles and some have even changed the overview without correcting the formatting. So "we strive to be consistent..."??? No way.

Quoting Flåklypa:

Quote:
Quoting myself:

Quote:
And you can see that many of the same people who voted no also own these profiles. They have contributed to the profiles and some have even changed the overview without correcting the formatting. So "we strive to be consistent..."??? No way.

Again.  I must state.  We are under no obligation to contribute.  We can contribute as much or as little as we choose. 

The only condition to contributing, the changes to the contribution must follow established rules.  (I understand that does not happen a lot)

I can make a change to an overview (perse correcting a spelling mistake, or a capitalization error), and still not change the font formatting (italics or bold). 

As long as the change is within the rules, we are obligated to vote yes (even for small changes).

If the changes do not follow the rules, we are obligated to vote no.

I also understand that there are some grey areas within the rules, and those we must vote upon our interpretation of the rules.

As for the OP's original statement

Since he is contributing a change to the overview, that goes against the rules, the voters (whether or not they contribute) are obligated to vote no.  If the OP wishes to correct the others, to what is displayed on the cover, then the voters are obligated to vote yes.