| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | Today I noticed that names with two initials are automatically divided/filtered between the first and middle name field during the contribution process if they are both entered in the first name field of the local profile. While this may be the proper way to handle American Names, this isn't the way names are handled in other languages and I would like to express my displeasement about this behaviour. If this standardization continues (like with Dutch "jr." suffixes) I will refrain from contributing profiles with Dutch Names in the future, because I do not want to cooperate on filling the online with incorrect data. | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,745 |
| | Posted: | | | | Isn't proper linking more important than an arbitrary assigment of name parts into different fields? | | | Karsten
DVD Collectors Online
 |
|
  | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting DJ Doena: Quote:
Isn't proper linking more important [...]? IMHO it is, very much so. I'm perfectly willing to give up tiny bits of what might be considered the "proper" way to deal with certain things in certain parts of the world for "the greater good", i.e. a common standard that we can all stick to, indeed resulting in less non-linking separate entries for the same people in the database. Also, there will be no "filling the online with incorrect data" as the actual on-screen credit is always retained in the "credited as" field. So that remark would only refer to the "name" field(s), for which we don't necessarily use "correct data" anyway (except a few exceptions like these initials, we use the "most-credited form", whether that is the "correct" name or not). |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
(except a few exceptions like these initials, we use the "most-credited form", whether that is the "correct" name or not). It would be more exact to say "we use, for contributions, the "most-credited" form". But for normal use, the "as credited" and the "most-credited" names have for some of us, strictly no signification and consequently no use if they are not correct : asian names, wrongly accented names, etc... | | | | Images from movies |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 3,830 |
| | Posted: | | | | . | | | | Sources for one or more of the changes and/or additions were not submitted. Please include the sources for your changes in the contribution notes, especially for cast and crew additions. | | | | Last edited: by ? |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 3,830 |
| | Posted: | | | | . | | | | Sources for one or more of the changes and/or additions were not submitted. Please include the sources for your changes in the contribution notes, especially for cast and crew additions. | | | | Last edited: by ? |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting surfeur51: Quote:
Quoting T!M:
Quote:
(except a few exceptions like these initials, we use the "most-credited form", whether that is the "correct" name or not).
It would be more exact to say "we use, for contributions, the "most-credited" form". But for normal use, the "as credited" and the "most-credited" names have for some of us, strictly no signification and consequently no use if they are not correct : asian names, wrongly accented names, etc... Why must you always pick this nit? It is obvious, to anybody without a bone to pick, that this discussion is about contributions...this is the CONTRIBUTION forum and Martin did say, "during the contribution process..." What people do in their local db has no bearing on this discussion. Back to the topic at hand, this change took place more than a month ago. See Ken's post here. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar | | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Also, there will be no "filling the online with incorrect data" as the actual on-screen credit is always retained in the "credited as" field. So that remark would only refer to the "name" field(s), for which we don't necessarily use "correct data" anyway (except a few exceptions like these initials, we use the "most-credited form", whether that is the "correct" name or not). It's incorrect to split up a double first name into two seperate fields if they don't belong there. If someone's first name is Robert-Jan or Peter-Jan and those names are listed as R.J. or P.J. it doesn't make sense to move the second part to the middle name field. I can understand their need to be a standard for all names, but we should not discriminate one culture in favor of one other. If we still have discussions about whether a maiden name should be in the middle or last name field, we also shouldn't be forced to split up two proper first names. It's all or nothing. | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands | | | | Last edited: by Daddy DVD |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 3,197 |
| | Posted: | | | | Wouldn't it be better to eliminate the need for name parsing completely instead of implementing an ad hoc function that effectively eliminates the one and only reason we have for name parsing: to distinguish between first, middle and last names? Now we have made an elaborate system that serves no purpose other than looking pretty, which could have been accomplished just as well with a single name field. | | | | First registered: February 15, 2002 |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Patsa: Quote:
Wouldn't it be better to eliminate the need for name parsing completely instead of implementing an ad hoc function that effectively eliminates the one and only reason we have for name parsing: to distinguish between first, middle and last names? Now we have made an elaborate system that serves no purpose other than looking pretty, which could have been accomplished just as well with a single name field.  |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 810 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting northbloke: Quote:
Quoting Patsa:
Quote:
Wouldn't it be better to eliminate the need for name parsing completely instead of implementing an ad hoc function that effectively eliminates the one and only reason we have for name parsing: to distinguish between first, middle and last names? Now we have made an elaborate system that serves no purpose other than looking pretty, which could have been accomplished just as well with a single name field.
pdf | | | Paul Francis
San Juan Capistrano, CA, USA |
|
| T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | You want standardization.you know where to go to get it. This is not them. Why do some of you persist in trying to turn Profiler into a CLONE, complete with all the various and sundry inaccuracies and garbage data. Skip  | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video | | | | Last edited: by Winston Smith |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 810 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr Pavlov: Quote:
You want standardization.you know where to go to get it. This is not them. Why do some of you persist in trying to turn Profiler into a CLONE, complete with all the various and sundry inaccuracies and garbage data.
Skip What are you talking about? Patsa posted that a single name field would solve most if not all of the name parsing issues. Three of us agree. What could be your issue with that?  pdf | | | Paul Francis
San Juan Capistrano, CA, USA |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | I am not taking issue with you or Patsa, Paul. But with the thread head and the OP. I tend to favor the single field concept for reasons of my own. But this ongoing concept of STANDARDIZING this, that and something else...NO; that path leads to a mess.
Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 4,479 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Patsa: Quote:
Wouldn't it be better to eliminate the need for name parsing completely instead of implementing an ad hoc function that effectively eliminates the one and only reason we have for name parsing: to distinguish between first, middle and last names? Now we have made an elaborate system that serves no purpose other than looking pretty, which could have been accomplished just as well with a single name field. A single field name doesn't allow correct sorting. So it needs a sort field, and parsing problem comes back. People who ask for a single name field have not yet proposed a way to solve sorting... I also agree with Martin that names should match each actor's country of origin culture. We have already had this discussion with asian names, and accented characters. The system that makes contributed names more and more different from the real name will just make people flee from contributions, since many of them want something correct in their local (Unicus, that is why you cannot have a reasoning on contribution system without thinking how people will use the program for themselves). | | | | Images from movies |
|