Quoting CubbyUps:

Quote:
Perhaps instead of the rules mentioning "actors" it should be changed to "cast members".

+1

Even though in both cases this would eliminate a lot of uncredited entries from films as "Forrest Gump"
(JFK and others are neither "acting" here nor are they "Cast Members").

Quoting CubbyUps:

Quote:
It the CLT is really just a Common Name tool then instead of being called a "Credit Lookup" tool it should be re-named "Common Name Loolup" tool.

I am not sure why it should be renamed as it is a tool used to look up credits in order to determine the most commonly credited form of the name.

Quote:
It would be separate from the CLT and would allow voters/contributors and screeners a quick and easy tool to verify if a BY is needed for any person regardless if they own a DVD with the uncredited cast member.

I still don't understand how this would help as there is no way for the tool to indicate that a BY is needed.  I mean, how could it?  Yes, it can tell you that there is an uncredited person by a specific name, but it won't be able to tell you that there are two, or more, people with that name...unless I am missing something here.

Quote:
Perhaps instead of the rules mentioning "actors" it should be changed to "cast members".

Except that the definition of 'cast' is "the actors taking part in a play, movie, or other production," so that doesn't help here.

That being said, I have always understood 'credited' to mean that they have a written credit somewhere in the feature.  In addition, if you don't consider 'real life people' actors, you can't enter them as uncredited as the rules clearly say "Uncredited actors may be listed." 

Uncredited Cast members may not be credited on the DVD but in invelos' land they are recognized. I don't see why they shouldn't be counted.

Quoting CubbyUps:

Quote:
But yourself said that it's used to lookup the common name.

No, I said it was used to determing the most commonly credited form of an actors name...the key word being credited.

Quote:
Huh? Do you really expect people to own every single movie/program with everyone with a certain name? The CLT is useful to verify if other people with the same name is in the online database. Thus helping to determine if a BY maybe needed. It's a stepping tool and once it helps with that then further research can be done to find birth years if available.

So of course it helps to tell you if two or more people share the same name.

How does it help?  When you do a CLT search on a name, you get ""Actor Name" is credited in the following # titles," then a list of all the titles.  Unless I am missing something, all the CLT tells you is that there is an actor, by that name, credited in a certain number of titles.  There is nothing to verify that there may be other people with the same name in the online database.  If there is, please be so kind as to show me as I can't seem to find it.

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
What I would like to see from the CLT is to tell the difference between people with the same name if there is a birth year. As of now if you search Kevin Smith you still get all the Kevin Smiths... not just the one you are looking for.

Exactly my point.  Even with a BY attached, there is no way to know that there are multiple Kevin Smiths without clicking on each and every title link.  I don't see how the CLT would be of any help when there isn't a BY attached.

While I would be happy to be proven wrong, I just don't see it. 

Quoting ateo357:

Quote:
This isn't true either. The CLT is names that contributors have entered & not all the names are what is credited in the film's credit role. So in fact they have already skewed the CLT with incorrect credited names.

I understand that, but most of this was caused by the mass import of old profiles that were never corrected...from the days before the rules, and voting, when IMDb mined data was routinely allowed...not because people are purposely entering wrong data.

In hindsight, I probably should have said that it is how it was designed to work.

Quoting CubbyUps:

Quote:
A good example.

In my local database I have a DVD called Warbirds.

In 3 of the 20 programs a pilot named Jule Clarke appears.
I have no actress by that name in my local database.

I entered her name into the CLT and discovered that there are 5 titles with a person with that name. Something I had no knowledge of until I searched for her in the CLT.

Using some common sense it is very easy to determine that a pilot would not play a zombie in a film. Or be an actress in a Baby Einstein DVD. Or be a Producer for First Men in the Moon.

That in itself verified to me that there are other people with her name in the database.
Thus common sense dictates that a birth year is needed to separate them. But alas no birth year can be found for any of them.

See the data provided by the CLT showed that there may be other people with the same name in the online database. How you can not see that is beyond me.

I already explaind how I don't see it, but I will concede that it seems to have worked for you, though only because you own the documentary, with the real life person, and assumed she wasn't an actor or a producer, but that isn't how you phrased the original post.  In the original post, you start with a person not owning the documentary.

Not owning the documentary, I am given a person that is an actress, producer and, if the documentary credit was included, a pilot...assuming, of course, I clicked on each title link, which I normally don't do when using the CLT.  Not owning the documentary, would common sense tell me that this person could be an actress, producer and pilot?  I don't think so because I know of several actors who are all three.

In addition to that, I don't even understand why you threw her name into the CLT in the first place.  I have entered many names into a profile, that weren't in my local database, and not once have I though to enter them into the CLT.