Question About "Known For" Section

I was under the impression it was generated from the popularity of the shows involved. So if The Librarians, Conan, Angie Tribeca, and Ellen are more popular shows (based on whatever algorithm the system uses), then they'll be the ones listed.

The same algorithm that determines what shows appear on the front page for the day, probably.

Isn't it based on the number of appearances of an actor in a show ? ie added at episode level, that was my understanding.

Since Wyle is added for all of the relevant episodes of ER (254), as well as 41 episodes of Falling Skies, I don't think so...

Needless to say, he's only listed for Conan and Angie Tribeca once each. But as the OP noted, he's "known for" those.

I guess I can see it being based on popularity. I can see how Ellen and Conan might be more popular than ER, especially considering how old it is. I definitely don't agree with that as a method though. Most episodes would make more sense, or a combination of most episodes and popularity.

I just noticed the "Starring In" section that appears when you search for an actor by name. This seems to be based on episode number rather than popularity, when you look at Noah Wyle's. This section looks more like what I would expect the "known for" section to look like.

Yeah, it's currently based merely on the show popularity, even if the actor only has a single appearance in that show. I want to improve this in the future, but I'm not sure about the method yet. Should 25 guest appearances on an old and insignificant show trump 12 cast appearances on Netflix's latest hit show? The ideal system would probably be some kind of mix of both.

Can you put in some kind of formula that checks for both? i.e., 200 episodes on a 1980 show trumps 100 episodes on a 2000 show?

Maybe average out # of episodes + (current date - date of air)? So you'd have ((200 + 36)/2) = 118, versus ((100 +16)/2) = 58. 118 "wins".

Or multiple years by whatever constant you want.

It doesn't have to be precise, since four shows are shown.

Talk shows in general just need to be removed from this equation. I'm not sure how you would do this, but it really should be done. Unless you are the host of the show, it's not what the person is known for at all.

Gadfly wrote:
Can you put in some kind of formula that checks for both? i.e., 200 episodes on a 1980 show trumps 100 episodes on a 2000 show?
Maybe average out # of episodes + (current date - date of air)? So you'd have ((200 + 36)/2) = 118, versus ((100 +16)/2) = 58. 118 "wins".
Or multiple years by whatever constant you want.
It doesn't have to be precise, since four shows are shown.

This definitely feels like a really good middle of the road option for when you guys change this. Two thumbs up!

LadyShelley wrote:
Talk shows in general just need to be removed from this equation. I'm not sure how you would do this, but it really should be done. Unless you are the host of the show, it's not what the person is known for at all.

I would say yes to this, except for the then problematic issue of what about the hosts? I mean, Ellen Degeneres is definitely "known for" Ellen, you know? Or the other cast/crew like the "correspondents" on Trevor Noah. Jordan Klepper, Hasan Minhaj, and Desi Lydic are definitely known for The Daily Show.

I'd think that if they're listed for the episodes they appear in, the formula suggested should cover it. We're not comparing actors to other actors, just to their own appearances to get the top four most... relevant.

Noah Wyle, for instance, the 118 you get above for ER (it's just a hypothetical) should outrank any relatively small number of talk show appearances. By the same token, Ellen would get a higher final number for hosting Ellen, then she would for a single guest appearance (talk show or otherwise) on another show.

Now, if she has 1 "high" show and 3 "low" shows, and those are her top four, then yes, her low shows are going to get listed. But a) So what? It's not like Ellen (or whatever hypothetical person you prefer) is known for a whole lot in that example, and b) the top four are the top four. If they're only known for one show but three other shows show up, it doesn't seem like the end of the world.

You're always going to get someone who has something listed that a lot of people don't know them for. The formula might give Monte Markham a high appearance # for The New Perry Mason even if a lot of people don't know him for that. ("Hey! isn't he that guy on Fringe and Baywatch?"), But it's not the end of the world if he's listed as being "Known For" the former.

http://www.tvmaze.com/people/31963/chris-pratt

I look at someone like Chirs Pratt, who was in 119 episodes of "Parks and Recreation" from 2009 to 20015 and 89 episodes of "Everwood" from 2002 to 2006, but what's highlighted in the "Known for" section is a single episode of "Mom" very recently, a single SNL episode in 2014, a single episode of Jimmy Fallon in 2014, and two episodes of Graham Norton in 2015 and 2016.

It seems these are sorted by dates of first appearance (2009, 2002, 2017, 2014, 2014, 2015 for the six reference above) and only the most recent four are displayed.

IMO, if someone starred or guest starred in a show and appeared in more than 10 episodes, that's certainly more important (and something for which they'd be more "known for") than one or two appearances on a night time talk show.

I'd suggest a sort criteria of A) more than or less than 10 appearances B) year of most RECENT appearance and C) show's popularity; and THEN take the first four.

GeekinTexas wrote:
I'd suggest a sort criteria of A) more than or less than 10 appearances B) year of most RECENT appearance and C) show's popularity; and THEN take the first four.

Sorting by number of appearances gets what they are really "Known for" to their fans. The popularity of the show or how recent it is is not important to an actor's fans. So the first four should be taken by order of number of appearances. If there is a tie, the more popular show should be chosen.

I think the order of the four should also be based on the number of appearances.

Moderator: Could this thread be merged with http://www.tvmaze.com/threads/621/known-for-sorting?

Closed: Duplicate thread. - http://www.tvmaze.com/threads/621/known-for-sorting