| Author |
Message |
  | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting northbloke: Quote:
I personally count all seasons as one title, as long as the credit doesn't change. If it does, I simply count the other credit as one title as well (so one title for each credit). This.  |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting reybr: Quote:
My point of view is that 1 season = 1 production = 1 title. Each episode from one season is from the same production cycle and because of this should be counted as one.
In addition, since the CLT doesn't show the count for episodes, it's more practical to use seasons. That's a very reasonable way of looking at things, and a very good definition of why each season should be classed as one title. It's also already possible in the CLT (although not easy, you'd have to ignore the disc-level profiles), and a lot easier than trying to work out the number of episodes involved. If the community want a concensus (and from the current poll results, it looks like season-level is more popular) then I'd be happy to go along with this as a standard. |
|
| T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | The even bigger issue here is that the CLT counts these TV-show-credits dozens, sometimes even hundreds of times due to the fact that the (localized) season indicator (and, for child profiles, the disc indicator as well) is listed in the title fields? As it is, pretty much every locality's version counts as a separate title: "Season One" in the U.S., "Series One" in the U.K., "Sesong 1" in Norway, "Erste Staffel" in Germany", "Seizoen Eén" in The Netherlands and so. Multiply this with the a bunch of child profiles (again, every language, but also every disc number is counted separately) for each of these sets, and we're easily into the hundreds for a credit in a popular show. This really wreaks havoc on the CLT numbers. I would really like to see this addressed somehow.
One possible solution that could easily be implemented is to have the rules prescribe that any TV-profile needs to have the show's original on-screen title without any season or disc indicator entered into the "original title" field. That'll do the trick without a program change. Another solution is one that does require a program change: introduce a separate field for the season and disc indicators, leaving the "title" and "original title" fields free for just the show title. |
|
| Registered: March 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,018 |
| | Posted: | | | | Then I would favour your alternative solution. Having merely the on-screen title in the Original Title field would create loads of profiles with the same Original Title. |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting dee1959jay: Quote:
Then I would favour your alternative solution. Having merely the on-screen title in the Original Title field would create loads of profiles with the same Original Title. I agree. Too many people depend on the original title field having the season/disc indicators in them. I'd like to see a separate field for seasons/discs. Either that or we stick them in the edition field. Was there a reason they didn't go that way to start with? |
|
| Registered: May 8, 2007 |  Posts: 823 |
| | Posted: | | | | I'm trying to understand why names can't be linked together using a table that uses a randomly generated unique hash as the linking field. That hash would be the "common name," and would completely end the ceaseless threads, arguments, ping-ponging, and back and forth discussions on "common name."
I seem to remember an understandable reason being explained on why this isn't possible, but I can't remember what it was. | | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." |
|
| T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Grendell: Quote:
I seem to remember an understandable reason being explained on why this isn't possible, but I can't remember what it was. There isn't one. An understandable reason why this hasn't happened, however, is that it would mean a fairly big overhaul of the program. Anyway: if a different system comes along, I'll happily go along with that, but I'm just saying that as long as things are the way they are, and we have to work with the CLT, then we really need to separate the many different localized season & disc indicators from the title fields. |
|
| Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 823 |
| | Posted: | | | | Of course... I apologize if I sounded like I was disdainful towards you and others personally... it just seems like a lot of good people are putting forth a lot of good effort on "common names" that could be going towards other things, if the program allowed for it!  | | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." |
|
| T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| |
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,459 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Grendell: Quote:
Of course... I apologize if I sounded like I was disdainful towards you and others personally... it just seems like a lot of good people are putting forth a lot of good effort on "common names" that could be going towards other things, if the program allowed for it! I never read it that way, and I absolutely agree with you. I can't thank T!m and the others enough for the work they've put into the common name system, but given the opportunity I would drop it like a hot brick for a better system. |
|