Title should be Credited As Problems.

If you an actor set up in your actor database with his full name because he was credited this way on one movie, and you have him profiled on another movie but have a different version of his name in the as credited field so the names link, a profile update will break the link and you will have to set this up all over again.

I absolutely agree, Unicus and have said this repeatedly. One partial solution to this is to be sure you indicate in your notes the the linkage came from somehwere else int he database, as we have no way at this time to figure that out. That is one thing Ken should try and provide, if a link has been created we need to be able to see where it originated and the documentation that accompanied, if any. But more importantly its all about standards and crieria so we are all on the same page.

Skip

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
If they get their choice into the db, it will mess up yours.

Only if you accept the update. All of my cast and crew are locked and nothing gets in or out without my permission. 

This is true, I have mine locked as well.  But should the entire community have to lock their profiles?  If that is the case, then why bother with an online db?  Let everyone just worry about their own profiles and be done with it.  I apolagize if that comes off as 'mean spirited'.  That was not my intent.  But more and more it seems like that is the direction we are headed. 

I don't understand this 'gold rush' mentality that says we have to use this feature right now simply because it is there.  We need a standard.  Ken has offered us a standard.  Why can't we just wait for it? 

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
If they get their choice into the db, it will mess up yours.

Only if you accept the update. All of my cast and crew are locked and nothing gets in or out without my permission. 

This is true, I have mine locked as well.  But should the entire community have to lock their profiles?  If that is the case, then why bother with an online db?  Let everyone just worry about their own profiles and be done with it.  I apolagize if that comes off as 'mean spirited'.  That was not my intent.  But more and more it seems like that is the direction we are headed. 

I don't understand this 'gold rush' mentality that says we have to use this feature right now simply because it is there.  We need a standard.  Ken has offered us a standard.  Why can't we just wait for it? 

I have to lock my data to protect the links that I've made. I'm not contributing these (one rare but well-documented exception). I don't care who locks their profiles and who doesn't. I'm only speaking for myself.

Even with the coming standard, one will need either need to bring their local in full compliance with the online standard or evaluate every update. It's no different from any other piece of data. If you wish to track data in a manner that is different from the herd, you have to evaluate all incoming profiles.

Old uncredited data that I want is being removed. New uncredited data that I want is no longer coming from the main db. Updates are coming in that change 'common names' to 'as credited' names 'because there's no standard'. No thanks. The herd data has become so sanitized for my protection that it has no value beyond a basic starting point from which I manually create actual usable data. And that requires that I lock my profiles.

Quoting Tracer:

Quote:
The real issue is if we do something locally that we don't want overwritten by a profile update we are going to have to lock our local changes.

Well... that has always been the case. 

Duplicate

Quoting Tracer:

Quote:
The real issue is if we do something locally that we don't want overwritten by a profile update we are going to have to lock our local changes.

But you can't lock an actor the same way that you can lock a profile. You add a new profile to your db and you have to look at each of the actors in it to see if there are links that should be fixed.

Quoting Boykin:

Quote:
I need to put this in feature request if everyone thinks it is a good idea. 

What about the update process checking to see if any cast or crew member being updated in the local db has any links already set up.  If it does, have the option to accept the update and add the info from the update to the credited as field preserving the link.  This way it would not matter. 

What is the standard that Ken has come up with?

Basically he said use the most commonly credited name as the common name, so if an actor has been credited as one name 25 times and another name 24 times the one that they were credited as 25 times wins.

Problem is how do we determine what an actors most commonly credited as name is.  Ken proposed making the entire Profiler DB online searchable so we could determine what the most common name is accoring to DVD profiler.  This websearch tool hasn't been released yet.

Quoting tlevel:
Quoting tlevel:

Quote:
Quoting Tracer:

Quote:
The real issue is if we do something locally that we don't want overwritten by a profile update we are going to have to lock our local changes.

But you can't lock an actor the same way that you can lock a profile. You add a new profile to your db and you have to look at each of the actors in it to see if there are links that should be fixed.

You can not individually lock each actor but, you can lock the entire cast and crew.

You are correct it may not link to another actor in your profiles because the profile you download may not have the same common names/credited as names that you may have setup locally.  But, this has always been an issue even before we were given the option of common name linking because we use as credited in the screen credits. Which actors are known to use different names from film to film.