 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 6 7 8 9 10 ...14  Previous Next
|
|
Title question: "Terminator Salvation" or "Terminator: Salvation" |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: January 1, 2009 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 3,087 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
...
Thus, "Terminator Salvation" ... Did I see this right: You changed your mind to from with colon to "Terminator Salvation" without colon?  Don' know what happened on the last two sides, that we got some of those red blocks,  but all over I think this is/was a good discussion. Helped me and hopefully some other users to make the right decisions in such cases. And if there still is unclarity, I will start a new discussion. But still I think a better cearity in the rules would bring up less discussion and a better quality of the profiles. (Not every user is always watching in the forum and perhaps miss some points we got. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting VirusPil: Quote:
Quoting hal9g:
Quote:
...
Thus, "Terminator Salvation" ...
Did I see this right: You changed your mind to from with colon to "Terminator Salvation" without colon?
To clarify: Based on the current Rules, I believe "Terminator: Salvation" is correct. If the Rules were updated to say "For episodic descriptions/subtitles, use a colon if it is included in the credit block (or there is no credit block)", then the title for this DVD would be entered as "Terminator Salvation". What I said was, I could live with this change to the Rules. Until then, it should be entered "Terminator: Salvation", IMHO. | | | | Hal |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | And I agree again, Hal. though i disagree with the whole premise of the credit block. Justt deal with it and accept it for what it is. We have already been through the whole deal about data just because someone doesn't like it and can't figure out how to make substrings work before, we don't need to compound it. Fortunately these oddballs don't come up very often so i don't believe we need to woory about them until they show up, trying to write a Rule which affects 1 title in a thousand will likely cause more problems than it solves.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | While I understand what you're saying, I don't feel that referencing the "credit block" is an overly complicated step, and would remove ALL ambiguity on this question. And removing ambiguity about how to do data entry of a field should be one of our primary goals I think.
Two questionable titles have been referenced in this thread. No doubt there are many others. | | | | Hal | | | | Last edited: by hal9g |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | As I said during a previous discussion of this nature, particular data that someone doesn't LIKE...why not go straight to the Copyright office data, that would tell us even more precisely what the title is "supposed" to be. I simply don't like the whole premise of I don't like this answer, so let's go look somewhere else and see if we can find the answer that I DO like. Data is not about what ililke or don't like about it, it is data. And just as in the previous discussion, if the substring filter is used, then a user will find Terminator Salvation, with or without the colon.
In short is this REALLY something that is worthy of several additional minutes research and work just to find something that someone likes, I don't think so. I STILL take my titles ONLY from the Front Cover, as opposed to film title, simply because that is what is seen on the shelf, but this silly idea of look here, there or somewhere simply in an effort to exclude something is just that it is silly. I use the substring and I NEVER have any problems finding any title Ii am looking for.<shrugs>
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr Pavlov: Quote:
As I said during a previous discussion of this nature, particular data that someone doesn't LIKE...why not go straight to the Copyright office data, that would tell us even more precisely what the title is "supposed" to be. I simply don't like the whole premise of I don't like this answer, so let's go look somewhere else and see if we can find the answer that I DO like. Data is not about what ililke or don't like about it, it is data. And just as in the previous discussion, if the substring filter is used, then a user will find Terminator Salvation, with or without the colon.
In short is this REALLY something that is worthy of several additional minutes research and work just to find something that someone likes, I don't think so. I STILL take my titles ONLY from the Front Cover, as opposed to film title, simply because that is what is seen on the shelf, but this silly idea of look here, there or somewhere simply in an effort to exclude something is just that it is silly. I use the substring and I NEVER have any problems finding any title Ii am looking for.<shrugs>
Skip If we were taking the title exactly from the cover in these cases, I would agree. But we're not. We're inserting a colon where none appears on the cover. I would not advocate looking anyplace else except the credit block on the rear DVD cover, which is after all part of the primary source material. | | | | Hal |
| | Registered: January 1, 2009 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,087 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
...Did I see this right: You changed your mind to from with colon to "Terminator Salvation" without colon?
Quote:
To clarify:
Based on the current Rules, I believe "Terminator: Salvation" is correct.
... Then I read this wrong. Thanks for the response. I can follow to use the episode descriter rule for original title, but with the idea: "2. The Cover must display the main title on one line and the subtitle on a second line using a different size font" I have some probs for original title. According to the rules we should use the film credits, so this doesn't match. Btw, wish you all a nice Happy new year party. ...I'm going now. | | | | Last edited: by VirusPil |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | OK Hal, then please explain Terminator Rise of the machines based on upon your premise. Which does not use the colon on the back cover, but the Copyright office does show Terminator: Rise of the Machines.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr Pavlov: Quote:
OK Hal, then please explain Terminator Rise of the machines based on upon your premise. Which does not use the colon on the back cover, but the Copyright office does show Terminator: Rise of the Machines.
Skip My copy has "Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines" in the credit block. UPC #085392-772322 | | | | Hal | | | | Last edited: by hal9g |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I made the mistake of not looking at my full size image, hal. The colon is not very obvious in the smaller image.  But the premise remains the same since this seems to revolve at this moment around one user not liking the answer that the Rules provide so let's go look somewhere else. Why not just take the Rules and take the title from ONE place, and please don't say OK the Credit Block. We have already moved from the On Screen Title, to the front Cover, to the Front cover and MAYBE the Credit Block to exclude data, and now. Why do we have to keep moving the goal posts. I would suggest just go back to the front Cover and if the data is then it IS, and learn how to use the substring filter. But that's me and my HO. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,635 |
| | Posted: | | | | We already reference the credit block to get clarification on possessives.
I would not have a problem referencing it for this situation if it eliminates all debate. That's my goal. | | | | Hal |
| | Registered: March 29, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr Pavlov: Quote:
I would suggest just go back to the front Cover and if the data is then it IS, and learn how to use the substring filter.  Search with substring filter will be easy...  | | | | Images from movies |
| | Registered: January 1, 2009 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,087 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting hal9g: Quote:
We already reference the credit block to get clarification on possessives.
I would not have a problem referencing it for this situation if it eliminates all debate. That's my goal. Could be a step for more clarity.  |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I will wager, Hal, that while I laud your goal. It won't really solve anything, at some point someone is going to take exception to whatever is in the credit block, and then we move the goal posts yet again. My point is I don't favor moving the goal posts, EVER, if it is absolute accuracy we are after we should go to the Copyright Office, since that is the only place we are going to get the actual registered title. Anything else is a guessing game, pure and simple, the various other sources may differ from the copyright for a variety of marketing reasons.<shrugs> I agree with Ken we are not after absolute accuracy, but then I am not troubled by possessives either, i know how to use the substring filter AND the Sort title field.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: August 23, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,656 |
| | Posted: | | | | Terminator Salvation looks to be the copyrighted name for the movie. While there are varients of the title also copyrighted, the one I directly linked is the only one that is labled "MOTION PICTURE" as the "Type of Work". | | | Reviewer, HorrorTalk.com
"I also refuse to document CLT results and I pay my bills to avoid going to court." - Sam, keeping it real, yo. |
| | Registered: August 23, 2008 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,656 |
| | Posted: | | | | Also to add, while I prefer Terminator: Salvation, I changed my vote to Terminator Salvation because the more investigation, the more it shows we are trying to add something that isn't supposed to be there. Just my opinion, of course. | | | Reviewer, HorrorTalk.com
"I also refuse to document CLT results and I pay my bills to avoid going to court." - Sam, keeping it real, yo. |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1... 6 7 8 9 10 ...14 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |