Quote:
This is an issue in a few updates of mine. Just wanted to run it by you all. My understanding is changing genres is fine if the current ones are clearly deficient (i.e. not listing disaster for Category 7: End of the World or not listing accessories for Digital Video Essentials) or if it's a part of a larger update. For instance: if I were fixing bad audio tracks on Futurama and decided it was better listed as Television, Animation, Comedy than Television, Animation Science Fiction (I'm not asking whether you agree with this particular change, just whether this sort of thing is ok in principle). Do we have general agreement on this?

Quote:
The rule is to prevent ping-ponging of genre order. If there's a valid contribution being made with other changes, there's nothing in the rules to prevent reordering/changing the genres. 

However, two points:

- There should be a specific reasoning listed for the reorder, listed in the contribution notes
- Even with a reason, you should expect a larger chance to draw No votes from users who disagree with the reorder.

It is likely the contribution will be declined if there is a significant resistance to the genre changes, so all things being equal it is advisable to leave the genre changes local unless you have a good reason to change them and expect consensus.

Quote:
Ace is absolutely correct - changing genres is not against the rules, as long as either a) there are other changes required and included -OR- b) the genres are blatantly incorrect.

The caveats I listed above apply to the wisdom of making the contribution, but there is nothing rule-violating about a contribution that meets one or both of the above requirements.

I'll trust this ends the discussion of whether these are against the rules.

Quote:
You are certainly welcome to disagree with a particular change in genres - the best avenue for that is a No vote with a brief polite note. 

I'm just answering the op's question, which is whether these contributions are ok by the rules, and they are.

Quote:
Newly clarified.  Here's the latest:

Use the Rating shown on the DVD cover. When there is no rating indicated or no rated version of the film on the disc, use the NR rating.

So:

Case says Rated R but disc has both a rated and unrated version = R
Case says "Unrated Extended Super Gross-out Version Too Extreme For Theaters", disc has both rated and unrated version = Unrated.

Quote:
So, what is the status on this? Ken says:

Case says "Unrated Extended Super Gross-out Version Too Extreme For Theaters", disc has both rated and unrated version = Unrated.

Well, Live Wire may not have an edition but the top banner does state R-rated and Unrated Versions and on the back it has the Unrated standard logo next to the R rating... I'm still a little confused by this.

Quote:
As the rule is now, the rating should be entered as R.

"When there is no rating indicated or no rated version of the film on the disc, use the NR rating."

The Unrated indicator is frequently in the Edition field for these.

Quote:
As the Contribution Rules stand now, company suffixes (e.g. Inc., Ltd.) are not to be included in Studio names and Media Companies.

My question is whether or not company suffixes should be included in Group Dividers (e.g. in Special Effects company names).

On the one hand, it could be argued that what goes into Group Dividers should be exactly as credited, and hence the company suffix should be entered as well. Moreover we cannot filter on what is entered in Group Dividers (as opposed to Studios/Media Companies), so removing the suffix serves no purpose.

On the other hand, one could argue that consistency within the Contribution Rules would require the ban on company suffixes that is in place for Studios/Media Companies to extend to Group Dividers (Special Effects company names etc.) as well. Moreover it could be argued that the legal status of a company (as indicated by the suffix) is irrelevant for DVDP purposes.

Opinions, please?

Note: of course, it would be great if Ken or Gerri could tell us one way or the other... 

Quote:
I don't see enough driving reason for completeness in this field to warrant deviation from the existing studio rule.  Therefore, leave out the suffixes here as well.  I'll queue this up for inclusion in the next rules update.

Quote:
Hi,
I wanted to contrubute a new profile (Ilsa - She Wolf of the SS), which has not been rated in Germany but the contribution was declined with the reason:
"The contributed profile is an adult entry, but was not marked as such. Please set a genre as Adult or the rating as Adult."
So how shall I mark this contribution, when this profile has not been acutally rated?? And no, I will not rate it as "FSK18" and remove it again in another contribution^^. I mean this is a mistake by the DVD Profiler team and should be accepted. Sounds that it's my fault, that there is no rating^^

Quote:
We've instructed the evaluators to require either an adult genre or an adult rating be assigned if the cover has nudity.  We do this so the online system can decide when it's ok to show a cover.  As always, the local settings are completely up to the user.

We realize that the standards of images which are acceptable to display vary from place to place and we can't possibly come up with any single standard that would fit all of them (or likely any two).

Let's be honest here - Invelos is hardly censoring DVDs, and we're not out to impose any particular morality on anyone.  Want proof?  Browse the (literally) tens of thousands of explicit adult DVDs and Blu-rays in our database.

So, it's quite simple - nudity on the front or back? Check 'adult' genre or rating.

Quote:
That's not the cover referenced by the op.  The profile in question is disc ID 11B85F0E92D36784.  Same title, different cover.

Quote:
I personally would mark those as adult, as the content is in that direction.  However, for the purposes of the discussion at hand, the evaluators would not require it based on those examples (of course we've seen only the fronts).

Don't forget that evaluators also sometimes (gasp) make mistakes, but if they're following the guidelines correctly, adult would not be required.

Quote:
Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
Thanks Ken...

So if I get this right... anything that has shown nudity on the cover is automatic Adult to get it accepted. But if a DVD is of a sexual nature it is ok to submit them with Adult also.

Yep.

Quote:
The only issue I'm covering here is what's already stated - nudity on the cover requires an adult genre or rating.

We're not stepping into the genre definition beyond that statement.

Quote:
If there's nudity on the cover, check adult for genre or rating. 

This does not preclude other uses of the adult genre and rating.

Quote:
You may wish to open a discussion in the contribution rules forum to cover that issue, however I don't foresee attempting to integrate a specific definition of 'adult' into the rules.  I believe that's best handled by the community at the locality level.

Quote:
I'll cue it up for the next update, however this isn't a new rule - the evaluators have had this guidance for years.  Likely the fact that some were looking at the wrong cover added confusion to this particular case.

Quote:
Quoting Staid S Barr:

Quote:
Where nudity starts? Use you own judgement, and the screeners will step in if they think differently.

This is absolutely correct. We're not changing any rules and this is not a new policy.  The Catch 22 covers and profiles all were approved without problem.

Quote:
All points covered by others above, but to reiterate:
The CLT is not case-sensitive.  Also, DVD Profiler will not change the case of a cast member when accepting an update.  It does all cast member comparisons without case sensitivity as well.  It's also not possible to submit a contribution with a "Credited As" entry that varies only in case.

With all that being the case (no pun intended), there should be no reason to change your local case to match, for standard deviations such as "De Nero" or "de Nero".

The case-based ping-ponging can occur, but it amounts to nothing as the changes are not downloaded for those that already have that actor.

By the way, kudos to all on a polite, productive discussion!

Quote:
Jan 22, 2010 - System Change - The acceptance system now removes 'Credited As' entries from cast/crew which reflect only a case change.

Quote:
Examples:

Submission of a cast member:

Name: Bob Smith
Credited As: Bob Smyth

Result: No change

Submission of a cast member:
Name: Bob Smith
Credited As: Bob smith

Result: Credited As is stripped during the contribution.

Quote:
I personally would not support longer contribution notes. Keep it short and simple and put the most vital information first.

Course I have a very different view of contribution notes that most of you do

-Gerri

Quote:
Cover Scans

Quoting Gerri Cole:

Quote:
It is very important with images to be specific about what your changes are if you are submitting a full size image and there is already one there. You should point out specific differences and call them out. The scans must be significantly different in order to be accepted.

Quote:
...
As stated, updating images require a significant increase in quality in order to get approved. It is usually good in the case of submitting a slightly better scan to point out differences that can be seen.
...

Quote:
On the cover of my BD of District 9 is sticked this adhesive:



The cover under the stiker is this:



Which one I should contribute as front cover?

Quote:
In this case the sticker is similar to a slip cover and so if it is the first release, that's the correct cover.  This is similar to many US versions I've seen where the back of the set is a flimsy piece of paper with a glob of temporary glue holding it on.  Those have the UPC, overview, info, etc. and are the correct back scan in those cases.  I personally dislike them as they have a habit of getting lost around my house.

It is incorrect to state that the first in wins - the first release wins, until we enable multi-cover support.