Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
While I disagree partially with Skip's standpoint I personally do not think it it worth the hassle (or 11 pages of discussion) submitting genre changes.

Huh?! Let me get this straight, this whole discussion wasn't about ADR Voices but about Genres?

Quoting Pantheon:

Quote:
While I disagree partially with Skip's standpoint I personally do not think it it worth the hassle (or 11 pages of discussion) submitting genre changes.

I agree with others here that it's first-come-first-served.

For example I recently audited CSI and left the child profiles as Suspense/Thriller even though I felt Crime was more appropriate. HOWEVER, I was submitting brand new child profiles into the online and on those I DID put Crime and NOT suspense/t.

Given that genres are such a very, very, very tiny part of a profile I just think they're best left alone.

My advice to T!M would be this: just don't submit them in the future (thereby avoiding this kind of futile discussion)...you do quite enough work on your profiles without causing yourself unnecessary difficulties.

I think that says it all.  There is obviously something wrong with the rule if it creates inconsistancies such as this.  I rarely use the genres anyway, there are just too many that are (maybe were) wrong for the filter to be useful.

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
I still use genres... but only locally. As I seldomly agree with what is online. The only time I will do anything with genre for online is if I am creating a new profile or if there is spaces left. If all 3 spaces are used I don't bother... even if I do think one (or more) online is blatantly incorrect.

Quoted for truth.

Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:

So as long as you are submitting lots of data, it is OK to ignore the rules on some little piece...not in my book. That way lies Chaos

I remember what Contributions and Updates used to look like, I don't want to go back there. The database was not usable to anyone.

Skip

Sorry, but you are out of step with what Ken has said. You can suggest to the contributor that a single part of a contribution should be changed if you believe it to be incorrect - but if the vast majority of the changes are correct then Ken has said that these should all be accepted. And then if necessary another contribution should be made to correct any small error.

Quoting widescreenforever:

Quote:
Let me add my two cents here as well..

I'm finding that where a title exists ( GWTW #012569591721 / 4 disc collectors ed. )., in with many many other upc and title locations , this title has upteen dozen 'uncredited'  cast and roles.., where to me this does not reflect the actual 'on screen' credit roles., plus it appears to mirror what IMDB has on its own website.., when I went to change it back to what is 'on screen'  credit roll only I was hit by a barrage of negative voters who state that these names are in the 'commerative booklet' ..,  huh?  who reads the booklet? 
and what about the other upteen versions on the market that don't have this  booklet.. 

BTW those 'other database ' versions did not have any negative votes and were whole heartliy agreed and accepted ..

Whether you read the booklet or not, it is a valid source for uncredited cast as it is an 'official' booklet put out by the DVD publisher.

Quoting Astrakan:

Quote:

Are you arguing that because many people haven't read or don't own the booklet, the uncredited cast of that profile should be removed?KM

Yes.., ! .,,  and What I was refering to as well.,  if you go all the way back to page one of this post.,, is a number of people who say " If not in the credits at the end of film  leave them out.."
as the rules sate " For any film with standard credits, take the actor information from the end credits only, with names and roles listed exactly as they are in the credits and in exactly the same order credited.   ..  This is all I am refering to.., one has a booklet, one doesn't ., The rules should be for the title only.,  ..

@ widescreenforever:
What you conveniently forgot to mention is another part of the rules:

"Uncredited actors may be listed in alphabetical order following all credited actors. Use the "Uncredited" checkbox to indicate these. Uncredited actors are not required entries.".

If we're not supposed to profile uncredited actors, then why is there an Uncredited tickbox in DVDP when entering Cast?

The name of the game for uncredited actors is documentation. The presence of uncredited actors in a film has to be verifiable. In general, standard practice as it has evolved over the years is to mention several independent (online) sources, or to give a time stamp where the uncredited actor appears in the film. However, if the documentation for the appearance of uncredited actors is provided in a booklet with an official release of the film in question, I can't think of any documentation more solid than that.

And if you want to remove uncredited cast which has been documented like that, there's a heavy burden of evidence on YOU to prove that the info in the booklet is actually wrong.

Documentation is the key...ALWAYS...for everything, not assumptions or guesses.

Skip