 |
|
|
|
Welcome to the Invelos forums. Please read the forum
rules before posting.
Read access to our public forums is open to everyone. To post messages, a free
registration is required.
If you have an Invelos account, sign in to post.
|
|
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...10  Previous Next
|
|
[yet another derailed thread] |
|
|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
I strongly disagree with you there. IMDb is not a valid source to mine data from - like not a single third-party source is a valid source to mine data from. But this it not data mining. It is a valid source, just like any other, to document that different name variants refer to the same person. Of course, the more the merrier, but as I said: there are occasions where we should be very happy that there is as much as one source. Gerri has stated, as I noted in the BY thread, that IMDb is not a valid source for BYs. Why, then, would it be a valid source for name variants? Can't use them to distinguish between two actors, but can use them to prove two names are the same person. Doesn't quite make sense to me.  At least, now, we all know why you don't include your source. If people knew you were using IMDb as your sole source, you would get a lot more 'no' votes. I sure hope Ken is paying attention. | | | 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: July 31, 2008 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 2,506 |
| | Posted: | | | | Although not an error of this sort, you do update the profiles that shouldn't even be in the database such as UMD releases  024543248484 - Die Hard 2 |
|   | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Forget_the_Rest: Quote:
Although not an error of this sort, you do update the profiles that shouldn't even be in the database such as UMD releases
024543248484 - Die Hard 2 Indeed I did - and I explained here why: it's (bad) data impacted the CLT results. It's true that it really doesn't belong there, but a recent attempt at suggesting removal of a profile had failed (bad entries still showing up in the CLT), so this time I tried a different approach: correcting the data first, trying for removal later. Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
If people knew you were using IMDb as your sole source, you would get a lot more 'no' votes. Decidedly not true. I use whatever I can find. More importantly, per the rules, we rely on nothing but our own CLT - what makes you think I ever even looked at IMDb? I've certainly had the link there for years. To me, it's very obvious that "Bunny S." and Bunny Speakman refer to the same person, especially since they're both sound editors, and they're both active around the same time. And Bunny Speakman has more entries in the CLT. That, per the DVD Profiler standards, is really all we need. | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
| | Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
[...]That, per the DVD Profiler standards, is all we need. Nobody denies this. It's just a pity that you who does know better, limits himself to such low standard, instead of striving for a better (higher) standard. Your data usually seems to be correct (even though Skip gets his funny face when he sees your contribution notes, even he doesn't deny this) so why not give your sources? And what exactly prevents you from actually checking that "Bunny S." and "Bunny Speakman" are identical? EDIT: Another example: For me as a german it's quite obvious that "Otto" and "Otto Waalkes" or "Loriot" and "Vicco von Bülow" are identical, but I'm very sure that outside of Germany not many people know this, so if I'm doing changes for a profile where they appear I'll make sure to make the notes foolproof. | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 | | | | Last edited: by Lewis_Prothero |
| | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting goblinsdoitall: Quote:
It's just a pity that you who does know better, limits himself to such low standard, instead of striving for a better (higher) standard. I don't "limit myself" to anything - it's just that, as I said, it's bound to be a lot harder finding documentation on a sound editor with five or six credits two decades ago, then on some of Hollywood's big stars. We have to take what we can get. Quote:
And what exactly prevents you from actually checking that "Bunny S." and "Bunny Speakman" are identical? What makes you think that I haven't? I've looked all over the net for documentation, both for the assumption that these name variants do refer to the same person (confirmation found - albeit just one), and for the assumption that there actually exists a different sound editor named "Bunny S." that was active around that time (no evidence for that). So there's a source confirming these belong together, and there's no source indicating that they shouldn't be linked. Are you sure you wouldn't have reached the same conclusion? There are some additional sources to be found, by the way - but they all seem to hark back to that IMDb-entry. I could have blown a lot of smoke and tried to pretend that they were more than that; present them as a full list of "sources", but I chose not to. Again, the likeness between "Bunny S." and Bunny Speakman, the fact they were both sound editors active around that time (we're talking 1987 here), that clinched it for me. How many sound editors were there around in 1987 whose name began with Bunny S? Do you honestly believe that these are two different people? I certainly don't. Additionally, I'd say the fact that there is a major website confirming the link is a big plus, rather than a reason to stubbornly keep 'em separated as two distinct, non-linking entries. I remain absolutely convinced that I've established a correct link here. | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
| | Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
What makes you think that I haven't? Your own statement: Quote:
To me, it's very obvious that "Bunny S." and Bunny Speakman refer to the same person [...] If something's obvious it usually needs no countercheck. But more important is that you left out my question: Why not give sources? If you checked and found only one source why not give it? Probably some time ago you gave a perfectly sensible reason why you don't. It's just that I don't remember this anymore, all I do remember is that you tend to answer with counterquestions. | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Decidedly not true. I use whatever I can find. More importantly, per the rules, we rely on nothing but our own CLT - what makes you think I ever even looked at IMDb? I've certainly had the link there for years. To me, it's very obvious that "Bunny S." and Bunny Speakman refer to the same person, especially since they're both sound editors, and they're both active around the same time. And Bunny Speakman has more entries in the CLT. That, per the DVD Profiler standards, is really all we need. Quoting T!M: Quote:
What makes you think that I haven't? I've looked all over the net for documentation, both for the assumption that these name variants do refer to the same person (confirmation found - albeit just one), and for the assumption that there actually exists a different sound editor named "Bunny S." that was active around that time (no evidence for that). So there's a source confirming these belong together, and there's no source indicating that they shouldn't be linked. Are you sure you wouldn't have reached the same conclusion? There are some additional sources to be found, by the way - but they all seem to hark back to that IMDb-entry. I could have blown a lot of smoke and tried to pretend that they were more than that; present them as a full list of "sources", but I chose not to. Again, the likeness between "Bunny S." and Bunny Speakman, the fact they were both sound editors active around that time (we're talking 1987 here), that clinched it for me. That there's a major website that confirms this link seems a big plus rather than a reason to stubbornly maintain two separate, non-linking entries for this editor. Yet another reason why I don't trust any contribution you make. I tell you the only source is IMDb, and you ask me why I would believe you even looked at IMDb. Goblin asks you what prevents you from checking that they are the same person, and you claim that you did. Sounds like a lot of double talk to me.  | | | 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 |
| | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
Sounds like a lot of double talk to me. Yet it's not. Is this really the best you can do? The fact of the matter is: do you really refuse to believe that "Bunny S." and Bunny Speakman refer to the same person? That is, taking into account that both are credited as sound editors working in the late 1980's? How many sound editors do you think were around in 1987 whose name began with Bunny S? Do you honestly believe I've made a bad link here? I don't. Yes, IMDb happens to support this - I can't do anything about that, but it really doesn't invalidate the fact that these name variants do refer to the same person. Quoting goblinsdoitall: Quote:
Why not give sources? For common names? Simple: it's the fact that the moment of research and the moment of contribution are not necessarily connected. The cause of that is that you mostly don't research a person for one profile: your findings will usually affect many profiles, while you're only working on one on that particular moment. And that one may get contributed five minutes later on, but for the other sixteen affected profiles, that may take quite a while longer. I'm really not going to dig it all up sixteen times over and over again... I'll probably re-check the CLT results when I work on any of the others, as they may have changed, but I don't have to re-check the established link again at that point. Additional reasons are: because it doesn't fit in the limited space we have for the contribution notes, because Gerri specifically asked for brief notes, because we simply don't have to, and so on. But really: it's mostly the fact that the moment of research and the moment of contribution are often weeks, if not months apart. |
| | Registered: June 12, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,665 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
But really: it's mostly the fact that the moment of research and the moment of contribution are often weeks, if not months apart. So between these two moments where do you store all this research? | | | | Bad movie? You're soaking in it! |
| | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 8,736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting tweeter: Quote:
So between these two moments where do you store all this research? That was exactly my point... I don't, obviously. A given profile may have 167 cast and crew members. Say I'll research the common names for 35 of them today - each one affecting multiple other profiles as well. Surely you don't expect me to store my findings for when I've finished with the other 132 entries - could be tomorrow, but could take longer, too - and then still keep it on hand for when I get around to auditing all the other profiles including even just one of these people? Basically, you expect me to maintain some form of common name documentation on about a million people?  I'm sorry, but that ain't gonna happen. You store the result of your work - the actual common name - in your database, and that's it. Again: I will re-check the CLT results to see if the balance hasn't changed, but an established link between two or more name variants stays an established link - also when it's a year later. Except that someone then (a year later) asks: "Why not give sources?", thinking that you've established it just now...  I'm sorry, but it just doesn't work that way. I couldn't do that even if I wanted to, and I certainly wouldn't dare to ask that from anyone else. | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Quoting Unicus69:
Quote:
Sounds like a lot of double talk to me.
Yet it's not. Is this really the best you can do? The fact of the matter is: do you really refuse to believe that "Bunny S." and Bunny Speakman refer to the same person? That is, taking into account that both are credited as sound editors working in the late 1980's? How many sound editors do you think were around in 1987 whose name began with Bunny S? Do you honestly believe I've made a bad link here? I don't. Yes, IMDb happens to support this - I can't do anything about that, but it really doesn't invalidate the fact that these name variants do refer to the same person. Is this the best I can do? I didn't know we were having a competition here. I don't know whether or not you made a bad link. What I do know is the only source that says you didn't, is one that Gerri has stated is not a valid sole source. Bottom line, I do not trust your work. I do not trust it because you do not show it. Until you do, and stop with the double talk, I never will. | | | 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 |
| | Registered: May 22, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,033 |
| | Posted: | | | | Wow! Seriously!
part of me agrees with Astrakan. I mean some data is better than no data. But in that light, if the cast\crew list mostly exists then don't replace it with data from another profile that you can't verify agains the actual version of the disc.
but then T!M's attitude and response to questions/concerns posed makes me have to agree with Unicus and others. There is quite a bit of double talk being used to validate this method, or you just claim the post is full of lies and dismiss it. If you do all the work provide documentation. If your doing this over a series of days and not saving your research then are you redoing all the work the next time you come across this actor. If not than how do you remember all these linkings (you yourself said your doing 35 a day, about 130+ per profile). To me that's another reason to not trust your work. Also, if you really do all this research in the name of fixing the CLT then why don't you document it and provide the results of all your research to the community so all can use it. Would actually make your job easier as then everyone can help with these linkings. A text file containing names that link and documetation for that wouldn't take up that much space either. Plus you could make a thread akin to the accepted birth year thread to make it easily accessibale to all.
I could probably go on but this thread is long enough as it is and you probably won't change your ways anyway. plus i'd need to reread the thread and take notes of all the rediculous arguments being made.
-Agrare
*disclamer* apologies in advance if i've offended anyone but i'm just calling it like i see it. |
| | Registered: May 20, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,934 |
| | Posted: | | | | I think I have to go with Unicus here.
T!M, you are asking us to trust and believe you. That is the whole purpose of the contribution system. In that system, trust has to be earned. I will trust a person more, that has proven himself right with notes, and my self reading and verifying those notes and comments. I will still go and check a trusted users work periodically (depending on the contribution) just to verify that my trust is still warranted. (Everybody makes mistakes)
I would not expect a person to take me at my word. I expect a person to check my work and my notes (I don't usually contribute much outside of whats on the disk). If a person chooses to trust my contributions then it is great.
How can I trust or believe your contributions. You give me nothing to check (even cursory notes). Without being able to verify your research (maybe not everytime) how can trust be established. I do believe that you do research on a number of things, but users have proven that your research can be flawed, but you in the forums and in your notes, refuse to acknowledge that.
Now I will give you, that there are a number of users that write very extensive notes, and sometimes that may be way overboard (depending on the complexities of the change), but on the other hand, you give us next to nothing.
Unfortunately, since you are technically following the rules, and can't necessarily disprove anything you put forth (shouldn't be my job) I vote neutral on most of your contributions. I also lock most of your changes out of my local DB. |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting T!M: Quote:
Show me where I've made such an error. I will only propagate cast and crew data when I'm absolutely convinced that no credit variations exists. I do extensive research to check up on this, and I am in a position where I can usually physically check several different copies: both from different formats and different regions. You'd be surprised at the vast amounts of work I actually put in - believe it or not. All in all, I am absolutely convinced that I have never propagated an error due to these alledged credit variations. Again: if you think I did, show me the occasion. It's easy accusing someone of something that might have happened - but it hasn't.
More importantly, as you well know, I have decidedly not done anything that wasn't specifically allowed by the rules and/or Ken's public clarifications. In short: if anything, I've merely been following the rules, and none of you have been able to catch me making an error. Instead of focusing on the thousands and thousands of errors that I have corrected, you choose to focus on the highly unlikely (and unsubstantiated!) possibility that or or two errors might have been introduced into the database. There you go hiding behind Ken again, Tim. I repeat just because Ken says we can does NOT mean we should. try and understyand that in addition to Ken and the screeners, we are answerable to EACH OTHER. Tim, have you give any thought to wjy I do my notes the way that I do, I don't think you have. Let me explain it to you. I owe it to YOU and ALL users both now and in the future to be a clear and complete in my communication as I can, and I am always looking to improve this. Now what does that mean, Tim. Look at your notes 6 months from now, long after the argument has subsided, somebody wants to make change to the data which you previously, supposedly entered, or just wants to refer to it...what do your notes say to future Contributors, voters or peopkle looking for reference...anything...useful...no, they say literally NOTHING, Tim and i am not saying that to offend you but it is a fact, your notes are as close to worthless as they could possibly be. My notes always provuide a reference point, I try and explain what i changed, why I changed it and any tools I use in the process. I also list the exact ACTUAL credits for Crew data, why because knowing that Makeup Artist for Ms. Dunaway is far more valuable than just Make-Up Artist or whatever. Again I do this not for me, if it were for just Me, I would probably do sometthing like you do. It is my responsibility as user in a larger Community to try and follow the Rules as closely as possible, without personal interpretation, and to Communicate as clearly and completely as I possibly can, to do less would be completely irresponsible on my part. Now perhaps you may understand my aggravation with you, you are a member of the same community and yes, I consider your notes and accompanying attitude to totally irresponsibl;e with regards the Community. What Ken says, to me, serves as a baseline NOT as the ultimate target.. You can do so much better, Tim and I really do hope that one day you will see this and really work to improve the database, instead of what I have seen for several months. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
| | Registered: May 8, 2007 | | Posts: 823 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Jubal: Quote:
Trying to cover your backside now? The bottom line, Tim, is that you should not be making changes to titles that you do not possess based on one that you do. This know to involve errors, just as you pointed out, and your example further exemplifies that just because Ken says that you can does not mean that you SHOULD.
Skip God shut up. | | | | 99.9% of all cat plans consist only of "Step 1." |
| | Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Unicus69: Quote:
Quoting T!M:
Quote:
I strongly disagree with you there. IMDb is not a valid source to mine data from - like not a single third-party source is a valid source to mine data from. But this it not data mining. It is a valid source, just like any other, to document that different name variants refer to the same person. Of course, the more the merrier, but as I said: there are occasions where we should be very happy that there is as much as one source.
Gerri has stated, as I noted in the BY thread, that IMDb is not a valid source for BYs. Why, then, would it be a valid source for name variants? Can't use them to distinguish between two actors, but can use them to prove two names are the same person. Doesn't quite make sense to me.
At least, now, we all know why you don't include your source. If people knew you were using IMDb as your sole source, you would get a lot more 'no' votes. I sure hope Ken is paying attention. So do, I and I PROMISE everyone, I will continue to hold Tim's feet to the fire and anyone else who wants to engagae in such sloppy work...I am very sorry, I have to call it like I see it. I see so much promise for Profiler and have for YEARS that is why I embarked on the Rules project with Dan years ago, and I see you near single-handedly undermining all of that promise, I don't think you doing it maliciously, I just think you are stubborn as a mule, and I really don't think you have any idea of the damage you are causing, I am not going to ask other questions which might change my opinion and I don't want to know frankly, I want to think that you just don't understand, not that you don't care. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
|
|
Invelos Forums->DVD Profiler: Contribution Discussion |
Page:
1 2 3 4 5 6 ...10 Previous Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |