Quote:
Exactly T!M.

Using what TheMadMartian has said, we've also got people who only use the CLT for deciding the common name in a normal situation, then we've got other people who create threads to see if it's right or not. Following his line of thinking, there's no point in those if people aren't all doing the same. I however disagree. Although it will take time, if people do do this, over time it will remove more and more of the incorrect entries be it IMDb mined data or incorrect common name due to poorly entered titles giving too many title results.

Quote:
Just because two profiles have the same original title does not mean that the credits are the same, no matter how often you argue that it isn't necessary to check each profile.  You cannot say that the credit in profile B is an "error" because it doesn't agree with credit in A.

Quote:
Quoting kdh1949:

Quote:
Just because two profiles have the same original title does not mean that the credits are the same, no matter how often you argue that it isn't necessary to check each profile.  You cannot say that the credit in profile B is an "error" because it doesn't agree with credit in A.

But in this situation all the credits are the same, no one has said otherwise. Every single profile for AVP2 in the CLT contains the same credit. It's only the variations in the titles that's causing them to be counted multiple times.
If there was crossover, of course more examination would be needed, but there is none.

Quote:
So, while ninehours, and the other nine people who participated in that thread are using 'George D. Wallace' as their common name, the rest of us are using 'George Wallace'.

Quote:
Quoting Forget_the_Rest:

Quote:
TheMadMartian,

Of course it'll help, slowly but it will help. I've got no idea who submitted changes as a result of that thread so I have to use fictional data to explain -

If all 9 people involved in the thread each submitted 5 profiles to show the true common name, that's 45 more that are now showing the right info. Then when they buy another title with that person in & verified the variant used there, they submit it and again it pushes it in the right direction.

But, if 9 people who didn't participate in the thread, do the same thing, what is gained?  That is the part I am trying to wrap my brain around. 

Quote:
Once again, we have a thread full of hatred and misunderstandings, with discussions involving rules "specialists" who are unable to agree on their interpretation, knowing on another hand that the online database is mainly made by "normal" users.

When a database is elaborated by thousands of contributors using different cultures and languages, the only way to hope to have something coherent is to have rules that are :
-simple
-intuitive
-translated in different languages.

Our rules are :
-complicated


-non intuitive (each time that we could choose a solution that meets common sense , we chose an idiotic one)
-only in english.

Though I admire the huge work made by some users to try to improve the resulting mess, I think that the only solution is in local databases taking their information in a minimal online directed by simple rules and intuitive guides. I know that this will, as usual, own me sarcasms from a bunch of users, and perhaps another ban from Ken. Anyway, if we want to get out of this impasse, the only thing to do is to make rules with no more than two pages, change the voting system to forbid changes that bring nothing, and share rules translations as we share system translations.

Quote:
         

Quote:
Could you please lose the habbit of posting a single ambiguous smiley without any text? Either express your opinion properly or say nothing at all.