.

And for non-standard naming conventions:
In these days, the internet provides us with multiple sources for bio's, actors homepages, fanpages, wikipedia and even IMDB. We just need to choose one version in the beginning, and then we'll only use the credited as. Where is the problem?

Same procedure as always I guess, skip still makes his own rules (James Bond DVDs anyone )

That brings up another issue:

The "Helena Bonham Carter" or "Courtney Cox Arquette" problem.  We need to have a hard and fast rule for determining what slot each part of the name is placed in.

It's my opinion that unless there is an actual physical indicator in the name, namely a HYPHEN, one must place the "middle" part of the name in the "Middle Name" slot for consistency.  There is no definitive way to prove beyond a doubt that someone has a compound last name if there is no indicator of that fact IN the name itself.  And, if the credits don't show it that way, it shouldn't be entered that way, some opinions to the contrary notwithstanding.

Yeah, it's arbitrary, but I don't care.  It's consistent, and that's more important.

You also have to remember (since someone brought up the DeNiro thing from Wedding Crashers) is that sometimes there are misspellings in the credits of films. I know that for a fact: a friend of mine got her name spelled wrong in the credits of Jackson's King Kong (well, when they mastered the DVD).

So it's got to be some kind of standard that applies to even this stuff. It's almost like you just need to use, as their "real" name, the one they are most familiar as: Samuel L. Jackson, Robert DeNiro, etc.

As for what Rifter brought up (the CCA and HBC), I would say it could stay fluid, and if you can prove how a person uses their name, that's how it gets used.

Example: Say in an interview, Helena is addressed as "Ms. Bonham Carter." That's pretty good proof that she's using "Bonham Carter" is her last name.

And like I said in the arguments at the "other site" on this subject, it's just like the Asian naming convention. Some people are familiar with it one way, and some are with other ways. I've got at least five people I know of personally that don't use a hyphen with their name, it it's still their last name (Cathy Andrews Konminski (name changed slightly to protect her innocence)). She didn't "give up" her middle name when she got married - she writes her full name as Catherine Elizabeth Andrews Konminski.

If there is arguing about it, why don't we have a poll to settle it. Majority rules. Or if we want to submit to absolute domination here, just have Ken tell us what we are going to use.

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
Here's a radical idea:

Leave the "as credited" aspect of cast naming as is in 2.5 - with this exception:  add a text field in which we can enter other versions of that name IF we know of them, an "Also known as" block if you will.

So, if Joe Blow is credited as Joseph M. Blow in Movie X, you enter that in the main "as credited" slot, then you put Joe Blow, and maybe Joey Blow, in the AKA block. 

That protects the integrity of the database, while still providing the other names for those who just have to know such things.

But as of today, this is not how the program works. The program lets you select the common name AND then add 'as credited' IF it is needed.

pdf

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
That brings up another issue:

The "Helena Bonham Carter" or "Courtney Cox Arquette" problem.  We need to have a hard and fast rule for determining what slot each part of the name is placed in.

It's my opinion that unless there is an actual physical indicator in the name, namely a HYPHEN, one must place the "middle" part of the name in the "Middle Name" slot for consistency.  There is no definitive way to prove beyond a doubt that someone has a compound last name if there is no indicator of that fact IN the name itself.  And, if the credits don't show it that way, it shouldn't be entered that way, some opinions to the contrary notwithstanding.

Yeah, it's arbitrary, but I don't care.  It's consistent, and that's more important.

There's that "consistency vs accuracy" argument again.

You want consistency; I want accuracy.  Consistent data is useless if it's wrong!

Again, hal it's all in how one defines accuracy. Accuracy against what yardstick.

Skip

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
That brings up another issue:

The "Helena Bonham Carter" or "Courtney Cox Arquette" problem.  We need to have a hard and fast rule for determining what slot each part of the name is placed in.

It's my opinion that unless there is an actual physical indicator in the name, namely a HYPHEN, one must place the "middle" part of the name in the "Middle Name" slot for consistency.  There is no definitive way to prove beyond a doubt that someone has a compound last name if there is no indicator of that fact IN the name itself.  And, if the credits don't show it that way, it shouldn't be entered that way, some opinions to the contrary notwithstanding.

Yeah, it's arbitrary, but I don't care.  It's consistent, and that's more important.

There's that "consistency vs accuracy" argument again.

You want consistency; I want accuracy.  Consistent data is useless if it's wrong!

Accuracy doesn't mean spit if you can't track it from record to record.  I NEVER said I didn't want accuracy.  But, I also know how a relational database is SUPPOSED to work, and data consistency (the data that is actually STORED) is more important than technical accuracy.

Let's say Actor A has fifteen different variations of his name that are in cast lists.  Being consistent with how you enter any actor's name makes it EASY to be accurate down the line with how you PRESENT information for viewing.  You make the output do the work, not the data entry people.