Quote:
Your quoting the wrong person for that. It wasn't Skip but Sugarjoe - Original Post

Quote:
Quoting sugarjoe:

Quote:
Quoting RHo:

Quote:
Therefore we get "Yun-Fat//Chow [Chow Yun-Fat]" for those credits.

This is one possible interpretation besides others. The rules leave us alone here.

No, not really. The fields are labelled first name, middle name, and last name. Those labels have a meaning and the meaning is not the same as first word, middle word, last word. First name is a synonym to given name and forename. And last name is a synonym to family name and surname.

Therefore Chow has to go into the last name field. And since the resulting string composed by profiler does not match the credit this way, we have to use the credited as field as well.

Quote:
Quoting 8ballMax:

Quote:
Don't know about everyone else but when I see film credits with Name 1, Name 2, Name 3 I enter them in the three available fields, Field 1, Field 2, Field 3. Unless it's proven with documentation that Name 1 & Name 2 both belong in Field 1 or that Name 2 & Name 3 both belong in Field 3. I don't fret much over it.

You do not see a credit with "Name 1, Name 2, Name 3". You see a credit with "Word 1, Word 2, Word 3". This could mean "First Name, Middle Name, Last Name". It could also mean "First Name, Last Name" (last name composed of two words) or "Last Name, First Name" (Asian style with a two worded first name) or "Title, First Name, Last Name" or "Stage Name" (composed of three words) and many more possiilities. You have to interpret the words in the credit. Otherwise you can not apply the given rules.

As you have said, with the given documentation a 3 worded credit may need to be stored differently as the simple "Word 1, Word 2, Word 3".

Quote:
Entering a known "surname" into the "last name" field is what one should do. The rules don't tell us to do otherwise. Some may have a practice of entering "first word = first name" and "last word = last name", but that's not directed by the rules. "Last name" very specifically means "surname" in America. It doesn't mean "third word" or "last word" of one's name. If one's "surname" is the "first word" in their name, that's equivalent to their "last name".

Quote:
Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
James:

From where I sit here is what I see. The intent of the Rules is tio get everybody on the same page. You take every opportunity to do the exact opposite and in fact encourage users to all do their own thing and input data anyway they want to. You have done this for years now. And frankly...my dear...

Skip

No need to get personal. Just posted my opinion... 

Quote:
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.

Quote:
Quoting madacid:

Quote:
Quoting RHo:

Quote:
Last time I have checked my dictionary, family name, last name, and surname were synonyms.

+1

Thanks!

Quote:

and thats why the CLT is useless for nearly any hongkong, chinese or hungarian film and more (exceptions may appear).

No, the CLT is uefull for those credits. For example with our famous Yun-Fat Chow the CLT gives "CHOW YUN-FAT" as the most common credit for this person. We can document, that this credit consists of the family name "CHOW" and the given name "YUN-FAT". We apply standard capitalisation rules which results in "Chow" and "Yun-Fat". Then we store the family name in the approriate field (the one labeled last name) and the given name in the first name field (first name = given name). After this we see that profiler constructs the credit "Chow Yun-Fat" for this name. Therfore we haveto store "Chow Yun-Fat" in the credited as field.

All of this is completely conforming to the current rules. But I would welcome if Invelos would add such an example to the rules for clarification.