Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
Actually Steve on page 1 also said to start the overview from below the images, but he never returned (wonder why!) to either support his decision or change his mind.

If it were me, I probably would have started the overview from below the image as well.  The reason being, the image creates two distinct pieces of text.  I have kept out of this thread because the tone went sideways really fast but, that's my 2 cents.

I probably would have left the first paragraph off myself. It was only Skip's argument that it was a violation of the rules that I took issue with. I have yet to see any proof that it violates a rule, by the way.

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
Do you have any examples of these pre-overview areas? I was curious so looked through my own collection, but couldn't find a single cover set out in a similar way to this one.
Please note, I'm not trying to argue anything (please stay calm!) I'm more curious about the situation, and maybe if there's a common link we can come up with some definitive inclusion or exclusion that can be added to the rules.

I agree.  An opening "Review" is fairly common, but this situation appears to be pretty rare.

Actually Hal, it's not. It took me about 30 seconds starting at the top of my listings to find several examples. You people are ignoring this but you have opened a can of worms that HAS to be dealt with. I have never called what you are talking about part of the Overview, FIRST as I have noted it opens the door for the entire back cover. SECOND, what do you call it to prevent the entire back cover from being included. As the Rule stands right now, IF this is part of the Overview then so is the Credit Block and the Fine Print, you cannot have it both ways, gentlemen and you had better deal with it.

Skip

As far as the OP's question, I would include the paragraph. 

I took a quick look through my collection, as I remembered a similar situation from sometime fairly recently (apparently back in December, judging by the date on the contribution note).  The R1 DVD for the film Sunshine (UPC 024543444589) has a similar first paragraph as far as content goes.  While that paragraph is a slightly different color, it is not separated from the rest of the overview and is the same font, but I feel there is enough similarity for me to use it as a comparable example. 

When I brought Sunshine home, I naturally entered it in my Profiler and checked it for a few pieces of data that are easily done, overview being one of those.  That first paragraph was missing.  To my eye, that appears to be part of the overview, so I entered it and submitted.  I assumed it was simply an oversight.  While I got one no vote to my contribution, asserting that the paragraph was a 'tagline,' the majority of the voters agreed with my assertion that it was not a tagline and the contribution was accepted and the first paragraph now appears in the overview.

Other examples of similar overviews I can think of are in the Fox Studio Classics line.  The back of the packages contain two paragraphs, here separated by a wide space, with the first paragraph in a different font.  All of the DVDs in this line are like that, sometimes with a wider space than others, but still always separated.  That paragraph is in every overview I've downloaded for these films, and while it is not a synopsis of the film, it's still a valid and valuable piece of data and I would not think of removing it.

As far as what to enter in the overview section, I believe that for the most part we each know what belongs in that block.  It's common sense.  In entering Sunshine's overview, I was never tempted to enter anything other than missing first paragraph.  Nothing else was logically a part of the overview - not the data block, not the list of special features, not the quote at the top of the package.  In looking at a Fox Studio Classic, say The Ghost and Mrs. Muir I would not enter the quote at the top, or the line of "1947, B&W, 104 Minutes" or anything below that line.  The only time I would enter anything that appeared below such text would be a footnote indicated in the overview.  It's simple common sense.

So, tell me Skip, is it the content of the first paragraph that you object to, or the style/placement?

Lots of overviews contain paragraphs with information like the one in this example. Should these paragraphs all be excluded because they are not part of the synopsis for the film?

If the first paragraph had actually contained information that described something about the plot of the film, would you have excluded it any way, based on font style, size and separation?

If it's so easy, please share the exact criteria with the rest of us, so we know how to apply it, not just to this example but to other titles as well.

Quoting T!M:

Quote:
For those who are interested: bentyman's '3:10 to Yuma' update, including the first paragraph, has been accepted into the database - as it should be, of course.

Thanks for the update

Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
I disagree with you, Gunnar as I have noted repeatedly Overview is a synonym for synopsis or summary, that pretty well covers it. Also as I have noted I have NEVER considered the example of the title in question to be a part of the Overview...EVER for the exact reasons i have previously outlined, different font style, size and physical separation.

Those are your personal guidelines. Most people determine the overview based on context of the data. It's similar to how we can pull a title off of a front cover even when other text is present above and below.

Quote:
If those are no longer valid

It's not that they're invalid, but they're not part of the rules. These are your personal habits.

Quote:
then Credit Blocks and fine print are included for the same reason since they are not disallowed as part of the Overview.

Credit blocks and fine print are not overviews. There's nothing in the rule that would force one to add all of the text from the back cover just as there's no rule that says all of the text from the front cover is the title. You have to acknowledge that discernment is necessary. There is no magic rule that tells us where to begin scraping data from and where to stop. We use our intellect.

Quote:
I have been uniform on this for YEARS, now  some users have decided to open a can of worms,

Your uniformity is a personal habit. Just because others don't agree with you doesn't mean they've opened a can of worms. If you wish to continue doing overviews based on your uniformity, go for it.

Quote:
Cass, it may be YOUR common sense and it may be mine, but that doesn't measn that it is EVERYBODY's, that's why I scream whenever someone says common sense...it is personal NOT universal.

This is a misnomer that keeps popping up around here. The very definition of common sense is sense that is common to all, but we can have differing opinions. In general, we all agree what an overview is. There is a minor topic-of-the-week about this particular overview, but it doesn't throw the rules out the window if we have disagreements here.

Gunnar,

Is it just me, or are you having trouble figuring out what the answer is, that was supposedly just given?

Really   

P.S. - Notice that my question continues to remain unanswered, as well.

Quoting Dr Pavlov:

Quote:
Ok then by the decree of Tim, Gunnar, ha, James, North and others the Overview now consists of ALL data other than that specifically disallowed by the Rules, this include credit Blocks AND Fine Print.

None of us have the power to issue a decree on anything. Nothing has changed with overviews.