The movie The Fighting Kentuckian, UPC 017153100280, does not have any closing credits or roles.

The rule reads: "Cast", "In order of appearance" or other similar headers at the start of the credits should not be entered.

The question is how about cast dividers like "Co-starring", "Featuring", "And" or other similar dividers which appear within the credits?

Me and another user have been having a discussion about this and he suggested I put it to the community.

As long as Invelos continues to approve the use of group dividers for song titles with only one credited writer, I believe this feature is meant to be interpreted with the widest possible discretion.

---------------

Quoting mreeder50:

Quote:
The movie The Fighting Kentuckian, UPC 017153100280, does not have any closing credits or roles.

The rule reads: "Cast", "In order of appearance" or other similar headers at the start of the credits should not be entered.

The question is how about cast dividers like "Co-starring", "Featuring", "And" or other similar dividers which appear within the credits?

Me and another user have been having a discussion about this and he suggested I put it to the community.

I have contributed these, in the past, without any issues...the dividers comply with the rules 100% so they shouldn't have been declined.

Unfortunately the rules tell us to use them whenever possible. I'm pretty sure that was not the intent though, and the poll makes it pretty clear that most people don't want them.

Quoting GSyren:

Quote:
To me that means that if we use them, they should mirror the credits if possible, not that we should use them indiscriminately.

This is what the rule says:

Quote:
Dividers allow the segregation of cast and crew into logical groupings. Wherever possible, these groupings should mirror the film credits.
•Use Group dividers to designate cast grouped in the credits such as "Soldiers" or "Additional Cast".

I don't know why anyone should conclude that groups such as "Co-Starring", "Guest Star", "Special Guest Star", "Featuring", "Introducing", etc. wouldn't be considered "such as" Additional Cast.  These would all be cast "additional" to the main cast.

---------------

I agree with Rizor. While they seem to be allowed, I don't think they are mandatory.

Since the majority does not seem to want these dividers, I would only use dividers if they actually describe the role of a group of the cast, unless Ken specifically tells us differently.

In my opinion, the cast list should let us know who was in the movie and what role they played. Trying to add dividers just to replicate the look and feel of the credits does not add any value, it just adds clutter. IMHO.

Quoting GSyren:

Quote:
Quoting iPatsa:

Quote:
Unfortunately the rules tell us to use them whenever possible.

Ah, no. What it says is "Wherever possible, these groupings should mirror the film credits"
To me that means that if we use them, they should mirror the credits if possible, not that we should use them indiscriminately.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
...  I understand that some people might not like them, but they can't vote 'no' simply because they don't like them.

They can and they will, because they don't like them... and it's not just group dividers or voting... Don't like the slip cover? Contribute the one you like, even write in your contribution notes that it's not the slip cover or that you don't like it and insult people who are following the rules... as long as you get enough yes votes the screeners don't care and Invelos does not care  It's annoying  But I don't care now anymore too and quit... sorry for the rant  happy easter to everyone though...