Yesterday, I bought a DVD with Dee Jay Jackson in it. I already had him in my database, parsed as Dee/Jay/Jackson. However, this (already existing) profile I just downloaded has him parsed as Dee//Jay Jackson. I'm now torn about which entry to correct: my old one, or this new one? I think one of the reasons for this D J//J parsing is the fact that he's credited as "Deejay Jackson" quite a few times, too: CLT shows 40 titles/164 profiles (vs. 222 titles/558 profiles for "Dee Jay Jackson", though).

- http://ftvdb.bfi.org.uk/sift/individual/474786
- http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0413402/
- http://www.tv.com/dee-jay-jackson/person/20995/summary.html

So: do we enter Dee/Jay/Jackson or Dee Jay//Jackson?

Why don't we just get rid of all parsing?  What does it actually add to the database other than problems?

(Sorry T!M but this thread deserves 1 page for every letter in his name)

Though my question is semi-serious...

It's complicated because he's also sometimes credited as D.J. Jackson, which would suggest D./J./Jackson. But then he is also credited, as you say, as Deejay which would suggest no middle name!   

Quoting tweeter:

Quote:
Quoting goblinsdoitall:

Quote:
AFAIK the CLT doesn't differentiate between first and middle name, you can't even enter them as such.

Goodguy's Credit Lookup Plus breaks the Dee/Jay/Jackson credits this way:

Dee Jay/Jackson  8  12
Dee/Jay/Jackson 220 546

You can do it with CLT by opening the individual credits, but I used CLT+, too.

Mmm. Just looked at the voting results for the first time (haven't voted yet myself): 11 vs. 12. Not exactly what I was hoping for. I completely agree with samuelrichardscott in that I'd very much prefer to get rid of all parsing. A single name field would do, or some kind of automated breakdown with no exceptions - anything but this horrible mess... This is another prime example: judging from the current voting balance, we'll remain stuck with two separate, non-linking entries for Mr. Jackson for years to come, with users who'll continue to parse D/J/J and users who'll continue to parse D J//J.

I'm willing to try and make the best I can from whatever tools, instructions or even just hints I'm given, but here, I honestly don't have clue which way to go. No matter which I pick, I get no-votes, and so, for half of the affected profiles, I end up having to temporarily adjust the parsing in my profile before I can submit other cast changes (and then change it back). That's taking things too far, IMHO: Ken will really have to address this at one point. Especially as, judging from the voting balance, it doesn't seem like we're ever going to be able to work it out among ourselves... Again: I'm happy to go either way, as long as we all go that way. It's really rather baffling that, in terms of online profiles, we can't even succeed in linking two film credits for the same actor together, even when he's credited exactly the same both times.

Quoting Woola:

Quote:
BTW Goodguy's lookup tool proves nothing relative to this answer.

Correct, it proves nothing.  But in 60 seconds i was able to determine how people were parsing it.  It's information and nothing more.