Dear Rules Committee,

With the influx of new users of this awesome program…a little bootlicking there , I have seen an inordinate amount of contributions to the database that, to put it lightly, suck.  For example, none of these new users are aware of the prohibition of using IMDb for cast & crew lists simply because it’s not stated so in the Contribution Rules.  It’s not a requirement for them to peruse the forums as we veterans do on a daily, in some cases hourly basis ,  and a lot of what we consider “rules” now are merely forum “consensus”. I’m sure it’s discouraging for the newbies to have their work summarily shot down simply because they were unaware of requirements.

Please, update the Contribution Rules as soon as possible because, I for one, am tired of getting PMs from disgruntled newbies when I shoot down their contributions for “rules” violations that they couldn’t possibly be aware of.

Thank you

From what I understand Ken has some updates he wants to do to the rules (he replied to a rule revision I sent him saying he has it on his todo list for the rules.).

But as for imdb... you can point them to the introduction section of the rules (1st page) in the third paragraph...

Quote:
The authoritative source for information submitted should be the DVD itself.  Please don't submit content from a third party database, and always verify the specifications printed on the cover.  In both cases, errors abound, so always verify the information directly from the DVD whenever possible.

(bold is mine)
I had to do this exact thing last night for someone.

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
From what I understand Ken has some updates he wants to do to the rules (he replied to a rule revision I sent him saying he has it on his todo list for the rules.).

But as for imdb... you can point them to the introduction section of the rules (1st page) in the third paragraph...

Quote:
The authoritative source for information submitted should be the DVD itself.  Please don't submit content from a third party database, and always verify the specifications printed on the cover.  In both cases, errors abound, so always verify the information directly from the DVD whenever possible.

(bold is mine)
I had to do this exact thing last night for someone.

Exactly what I did yesterday, though I added Ken's statement from one of the forum threads where he said:

Quote:
This is not a wink wink, nudge nudge "rule".  We do not want IMDB data, or data from any third party database, entered into DVD Profiler. The reason for this is that they have invested much time and money (as we have) into generating and maintaining their database.  Copying their database is theft.  If that weren't enough reason, third party databases routinely spike their data with "poison" data - false data designed to identify and prove cases of theft.

The requirement for naming the source is not designed to allow Invelos plausible deniability.  If the submitted data came from the IMDB or another source, we need to know that so we may properly decline the submission.  Falsely stating the source of data in an attempt to bypass this will result in an immediate and permanent ban from contributing

Emphasis is mine.

I think the contributor and I came to an understanding - and parted politely.

Quoting Kevin:

Quote:
But how do the newbs know that we call IMDB, et al "third party databases?" Most people just think of them as websites.

They don't.

That is why the rules should point out that IMDb, MSN Movies, Yahoo Movies, etc. are "third party databases".

pdf

Don't the "newbie's" still have to pass a test before contributing?

Quoting CubbyUps:

Quote:

Quote:
The authoritative source for information submitted should be the DVD itself.  Please don't submit content from a third party database, and always verify the specifications printed on the cover.  In both cases, errors abound, so always verify the information directly from the DVD whenever possible.

Perhaps this should be re-worded to make it a little clearer.

Right now it sounds like there is a 100% ban on the use of 'third part databases', but as Skip ponted out there are cases where the use of them is helpful to verify info.

I would re-word it as the following:
"The primary source for information should be from the DVD itself. Please don't submit content that is completely based on information from third part databases. Specifications should be verified from the DVD itself or secondary source is the DVD cover. In either case, errors abound, so always verify information from the DVD itself and that the information is primarily from the DVD itself whenever possible. For information that can't be verified from the DVD itself, other sources must be provided for verification purposes."

Too long and it allows to much.

BTW, no third party sources are allowed. First party (the film/DVD) and second party (official/authorized websites and the like) are allowed.

Quoting Dan W:

Quote:
Don't the "newbie's" still have to pass a test before contributing?

t

After reading all the debating among "oldies" I think "newbies" AND "oldies" need to pass a test!  

Quoting Dan W:

Quote:


BTW, no third party sources are allowed. First party (the film/DVD) and second party (official/authorized websites and the like) are allowed.

And how do you verify information that can't be gained from the DVD or when there is no second part sources available?

In all honesty, there has to be some room for users to use sources to verify info that can't be gained from the film or secondary sources. As long as the use is limited to only the few cases to verify only specific members of the cast/crew I see nothing wrong with it. Such as name variations, credited as or name changes (perhaps due to marriages).

IMDB may spike their database with info to spot theft, but that would be for their roles only. I don't see how they could spike an actor credited as name when it matches that of the film.

Perhaps I didn't make my case clear.

Let's say you are doing a profile for a movie and come across an actor whose name is Steven DeMort, so you enter that into the profile but discover that there is already an actor in the database by the name of Steven De Mort.

Now this is an older film, so their is no official film site and the actor has no official site either. So you check out IMDB to discover that he goes by both names and in this film was credited as DeMort.

If we ban the use of IMDB to verify such information than there would be no way to connect the same actor and then their would be 2 listings in the database for the same actor.

And perhaps there may be other name variations of the same actor.
Steve DeMort
Steve De Mort
Steven Demort
Steve Demort

So now there could be at least 6 entries in the database for the same and one actor.

I nowhere meant that info from IMDB should be copied and pasted into the database, but only to verify information that pertains to an actors identity.

I think the rules allow it if you read the following.
so always verify the information directly from the DVD whenever possible.

Name variations and name changes sometimes can't be verified from the DVD itself, and when a name variation is already in the database third party databases are sometimes useful to verify an actors identity.