I have tried keeping this out of the forums as long as possible, but I am fed up, and feel the need to adress the situation here;

I have currently updated the profiles for "The Jurassic Park Trilogy" with children, and doing so found numerous errors and incomplete profiles. In the initial contribution notes for the children the contributor stated to have taken the cast and crew from the DVD. As I went through the profiles I discovered that this was a WRONG, as all the role descriptions for the cast was identical to IMDb (and not at all what you see in the Film's credits), and lots of common names were used without reason or source (also strikingly similiar to IMDb's "common name" use).

Now - to give the initial contributor the benefit of the doubt, I simply corrected the profiles, and stated in my contribution notes that the Cast and Crew was visually verified from Film's credits.
But, when the user in question votes no with the reason being that he has taken the cast and crew from Film's credits, I must say that either he is beyond stupid, or he has so little respect for the data put into the DB, that he doesn't care that he has "erred" in his notes and data.

To back up my claim that initial data is from IMDb, I noted that in Jurassic Park III, the initial profile credits Frank "Pepe" Merel as Sound, when in fact he is credited on screen as Foley Recordist and with the name Frank Merel. IMDb lists him as Frank "Pepe" Merel : Sound. I rest my case! 

I updated my contribution notes, explaining the situation, but the addition still got declined. I even PM'd Gerri about this particular users behaviour, but naught seems to have come from it.

In light of recent discussions regarding DB accuracy I therefore feel the need to voice my concerns in the forum. If this user continues sabotaging valid contributions (and is left to do so), I frankly can't see any reason to continue adding information that eventually gets declined.

It would be nice, though, if someone downloaded the profile 5050582463699 with children and checked against their own copies of said movies, to show that I've not entirely lost my mind when claiming my updates are valid... 

Quoting SpaceFreakMicha:

Quote:
your work is REALLY appreciated by many of us. 

I'll second that 

Quoting NewEnglander:

Quote:
Third!

FOURTH!!!

Quoting ArnoDVDs:

Quote:

Quote:

your work is REALLY appreciated by many of us. 

Fifth !!

Sixth!

Quoting Berak:

Quote:

To back up my claim that initial data is from IMDb, I noted that in Jurassic Park III, the initial profile credits Frank "Pepe" Merel as Sound, when in fact he is credited on screen as Foley Recordist and with the name Frank Merel. IMDb lists him as Frank "Pepe" Merel : Sound. I rest my case! 

If you can, take a screenshot of the credits and include a link to it in the contribution notes. Then there is no doubt for the screeners that the original contributor is lying in his vote. It should be unnecessary, but it has helped me before, when I have had to deal with this person.

I just updated my YES vote on that contribution, with following notes;  Berak's contribution is 100% correct from end credits of movie. Previously contribution is wrong, I just checked against my own copy of the movie.

Hope the screeners read in yes votes too, so they see the previous contributer is lying.

Did he lie? Yes. Then he's a liar.

I call a spade a spade, what do you call it?

Quoting Jykke:

Quote:
Norway got its own Trinitron. 

Berak, you are absolutely right with your contribution. Your contribution match with the Finnish locality profile of the very same disc (contributed by me). 

However, was it really necessary to "attack" the original contributor with liar accusations in your contribution notes:

Quote:
Furthermore, the existing profiler insists he has taken the Cast and Crew credits from Film's credits, but as my corrections reflects, this is a complete and utter lie.

even though he did adapt the truth about the origin of the cast/crew source in his original notes. 

You could only have noted that the current profile is wrong and said nothing about the previous notes. Some people are too sensitive if you call them a liar (even though you were right) and then these morrons [sic] answer the same way back.

Seriously? As I stated in my intial post, he had the chance to redeem himself when I updated the profile, but he choose to continue his path of deception and voted no on my perfectly valid update! If this doesn't qualify as a liar in your vocabulary - I wonder what does.