Display of Main Cast, Guest Stars, Credits on Persons' page and search results

Tonks wrote:
I think there should be a static system to display main cast, guest stars and stars on search results. Right now, it has been noted as random by the developpers... Also increasing the number of actors listed either on main page of a show or an episode would be a great improvement.
Could we get an increase of number of actors displayed on a show main page ? maybe to 15 ?
Having the possibility NOT to create characters guide, or redesigning the form so that it's not cumbersome as it is right now.
There are several options available for Main cast and guest stars :
Main Cast
- In the order of entering them, people who follow the credits would then have them in their proper order.
- alphabetical order (not my favorite choice, and probably not to the likings of the actors)
- using a ranking system that has no impact on episodes main cast when changed, this way it would let contributors entering them in any order they want and then make sure they're listed in credits order
Guest Stars : showing them all on the episode main page instead of having to go to a sub page to see them all
- In the order of entering them, people who follow the credits would then have them in their proper order, this would then be applied to Special guest-stars, guest-stars, co-guest stars, animals, uncredited
- alphabetical order (not my favorite choice, and probably not to the likings of the actors)
- using a ranking system, this way it would let contributors entering them in any order they want and then make sure they're listed in credits order.
The rank would be an added option (tvrage had the system that you had to start at a high number and then decrease), but it was never logical to go that way, so starting from 1 to whatever would be easiest.
- An option NOT to create a character's guide, the same way that when you are in the process of adding people you have to check a box to return to that form... cause having characters' guide for the EMTs or uniform cop1 has no real positive outcome.
Search Results :
Right now, there is no heads or tails to which main cast show on that result when you search for a show. I was told it was random, but on several days, i got the same results for Chicago Fire, the same three... If the rank system is in place, then the first three, the ones that have the more weight show wise would display. So in the case of Chicago Fire it would show Jesse Spenser, Taylor Kinney and Monica raymund.. It also doesn't take into account if an actor was a guest for a long time before being promoted, so for example on Grey's Aantomy, what could show first would be the nurses or EMTs that are on every episode since the beginning instead of the Ellen Pompeo, Patrick Dempsey (i know he's not in it anymore) and Katherine Heigl (i know she's not in it anymore) but that would be according to the beginning of the show.
Credits display on person's Page
Right now, what governs the display is when a show is launched.
It could be chronological... from latest (top) to oldest (bottom) episode. Like imdb, not the best, but it makes for a complete filmography and easy to read to.
or It could be alphabetical and within that alphabet, it would/should be chronological.
You could also have the starring roles at the top (with number of appearances in parentheses), then the guest starring below with collapsing system like you have right now
http://www.tvmaze.com/people/7544/yuri-sardarov

This was an in depth post, I will try to answer and state my opinion on some of it :)

MAIN CAST: I definitely agree that the best option is to have them shown in the order as they appear on screen. What we have to keep in mind is, that by far not all main cast is entered from on screen credits, some come from press releases and some from other various sources.

GUEST STARS: see above; for a listing of all guest stars on one page, this is fine as long as the number of guest stars is reasonable, for shows like Sense8 or Game Of Thrones, the page would be enourmous.
I am not a friend of a ranking system, but this is my personal opinion, I wasn't fond of it on tvrage either. Displaying them by number of appearances suits my taste more.
I agree that we do not need a character page for each Nurse, Electrician, Policeman, Worker and so on, but where exactly shall we draw the line? And what if that one Nurse becomes a popular character later in the show?

SEARCH RESULTS: I think the main cast with most appearances in the whole series is shown first now, if I understood david correctly.
On first glance it is logical to show the most important three main cast within the search results, but I am sure that not everyone agrees which main cast is the most important one, opinions will differ on this subject a lot.

CREDITS DISPLAY: For my likes the best way is to go with alphabetical.

cheers
Juan

Haha yeah, I appreciate your feedback Tonks, but most of your posts are so long they're too overwhelming to even respond to right now. I'll get to that... eventually :)

To juan : Thanks, this is the suggestion forum so i laid out several options because i am not set on any even though i have a preference which i have stated for each case.

Rank is an option in any case, people would use it or not... Availability of something doesn't mean people will use it.

Characters' guide, i'm not understanding the point of popularity ? I understand you'd want default for main cast, but for guest stars, it makes little sense to me, thus my proposal to unload some of the work by letting us choose.

I'd understand the interests if you could do more with characters guide but you guys have seem pretty clear on not wanting quotes, cultural references etc and those would so neatly be used for characters' guide.

And i'm going to say my preference in any display is going to be chronological because this is how a CV is written from latest to oldest, not in alphabetical order which makes something less readable but like i said if alphabetical is used for credits on person' page at least in chrolonogical within a specific show ;)

David : i don't like creating multiple topics for the same subject, but if you want that, no problem.... I think you'll hate it even more, though.

I am still in favor of having a numbering system set up 0 to 999. Then when we add a cast member in to the main cast we can assign a number to them with the highest number getting top billing or shows up first like this 100 then 99 then 98 etc. I know there would be many cases where people would disagree who should be on top or first but most TV sites differ on whom they list on top or first so that's nothing new. I think the way to resolve this is when the cast is first input/entered the contributor assigns the number to each that they believe should be listed higher than the others. Then after say 3 to 5 episodes the system kicks in based on appearances and changes the numbers of those that are lower then they really should be and re-arranges the listing.

At the point where the system kicks in no-one except The BIG 4 can change their numbers again or remove anyone but anyone can add to the cast if needed?

Tonks wrote:
To juan : Thanks, this is the suggestion forum so i laid out several options because i am not set on any even though i have a preference which i have stated for each case.
Rank is an option in any case, people would use it or not... Availability of something doesn't mean people will use it.
Characters' guide, i'm not understanding the point of popularity ? I understand you'd want default for main cast, but for guest stars, it makes little sense to me, thus my proposal to unload some of the work by letting us choose.
I'd understand the interests if you could do more with characters guide but you guys have seem pretty clear on not wanting quotes, cultural references etc and those would so neatly be used for characters' guide.
And i'm going to say my preference in any display is going to be chronological because this is how a CV is written from latest to oldest, not in alphabetical order which makes something less readable but like i said if alphabetical is used for credits on person' page at least in chrolonogical within a specific show ;)
David : i don't like creating multiple topics for the same subject, but if you want that, no problem.... I think you'll hate it even more, though.

Popularity means...in more epsiodes an actor appears the higher it is ranked. It is one way of doing this, there are several other ways one can do it, but right now we are doing it that way.

And I said i agree that it would be best to do it as it was credited on screen, but this will be impossible as then every show must have a person who watches it and enters the cast as it appears on screen.

cheers
juan

JuanArango wrote:

And I said i agree that it would be best to do it as it was credited on screen, but this will be impossible as then every show must have a person who watches it and enters the cast as it appears on screen.
cheers
juan

You wouldn't have to have it that every show that has every credit order correct and must have a person who watches it. But having the option would mean that some would be correct.

It's not impossible. It just means that not every show would have it. But having some shows with it would be... better than none?

That's like saying because it's impossible that every car has seatbelts, no cars should have seatbelts. :)

Whether it's worth programming it for only 5-10-20%+ of the shows is something David would have to answer.

Gadfly wrote:
You wouldn't have to have it that every show that has every credit order correct and must have a person who watches it. But having the option would mean that some would be correct.
It's not impossible. It just means that not every show would have it. But having some shows with it would be... better than none?
That's like saying because it's impossible that every car has seatbelts, no cars should have seatbelts. :)
Whether it's worth programming it for only 5-10-20%+ of the shows is something David would have to answer.

You are correct, it would be worth having it, but how would you handle this then ?

How can we/david know which cast is entered from on screen ? What do we do with the other shows ?

And yes, is this worth the effort of coding it is the next question :)

cheers
Juan

JuanArango wrote:

You are correct, it would be worth having it, but how would you handle this then ?
How can we/david know which cast is entered from on screen ? What do we do with the other shows ?
And yes, is this worth the effort of coding it is the next question :)
cheers
Juan

How would I handle what? How do you know the cast order is entered from on screen? The same way you know that the cast is entered from on screen? (However that is...)

What do you do what with what other shows? Like some features, it probably doesn't matter about shows that no one watches. Does anybody care that, say, David Cassidy Man Undercover cast is in order? Probably not. For the shows that people do watch, someone is more likely to do it if it's a more popular show. If there's disagreement, then open-edit will resolve the issue.

Gadfly wrote:

How would I handle what? How do you know the cast order is entered from on screen? The same way you know that the cast is entered from on screen? (However that is...)
What do you do what with what other shows? Like some features, it probably doesn't matter about shows that no one watches. Does anybody care that, say, David Cassidy Man Undercover cast is in order? Probably not. For the shows that people do watch, someone is more likely to do it if it's a more popular show. If there's disagreement, then open-edit will resolve the issue.

You misunderstood me :)

david needs to sort the main cast in some way or another, right now it is according to appearances in the show.
if we switch and say it is sorted in the way it is entered (from on screen), then ONLY the cast would appear correct which is actually entered from "on screen".

All other cast would be sorted the way it is entered (press releases, various other sources), so for a lot of shows there would be no sorting algorythm at all, as we would just display everything in the order it is entered, if someone adds Felicity Smoke from Arrow first, she would be displayed as first.

So the solution would only work perfectly for shows that were actually enetered from "on screen" credits.

cheers
Juan

I'm not sure I still understand you :) , but...

If David doesn't add any sorting algorithm that users can edit, then yes, you're at the mercy of whatever algorithm David uses. Be it FIFO (first in, first out), random, or whatever. That solution won't work perfectly. Which is why... you need a better solution. :)

Gadfly wrote:
I'm not sure I still understand you :) , but...
If David doesn't add any sorting algorithm that users can edit, then yes, you're at the mercy of whatever algorithm David uses. Be it FIFO (first in, first out), random, or whatever. That solution won't work perfectly. Which is why... you need a better solution. :)

yes :)

but so far we have not found a better one than to sort it by show appearances.
When the special guest star, guest star, co-guest star is done, we got some more time to dive into this.

cheers
Juan

JuanArango wrote:

1- Popularity means...in more epsiodes an actor appears the higher it is ranked. It is one way of doing this, there are several other ways one can do it, but right now we are doing it that way.
2- but this will be impossible as then every show must have a person who watches it and enters the cast as it appears on screen.

1 - And a nurse is going to be popular because she appears in every episode of a show or a cop ? That makes no sense to me. I get this logic for search engines but we're talking what are supposed to be static pages... we're talking about shows, characters' guides on shows.

2 - Gadfly already covered it all

There are ways to do this : have an option "verified credit order" like imdb does or have editors... Not all editors will do it, but most will. Or both... You will always have people who will correct stuff anyways. .

To me, it looks like you're applying a search logic to static pages and those are two different beasts.

You also said what a nightmare it would be to have all guest in the main episode page while you have that gigornomous trailer window, no other info (no quotes, no cultural references, no possibility of adding the songs), so i'm not seeing the real problem here, i'm seeing a huge trailer, which could be divided by at least 1/3 of its size. Imdb looks to be doing fine and that is exactly what they do ;)

If you go to the guest cast page to get all, it's the same except we don't have that huge trailer. And not all people have images, for those that don't, it should be a simple line with the character's name and that will mostly happen to co-guest stars. Overall, we don't need them across board, having an option not to create a characters' guide when we know that it will never be useful is reasonable.

I'm not dissing characters' guide for the sake of dissing them. But the only thing on a characters' page is maybe an image from a show that you know you may be forced to pull because of copyright (which is a problem) and a fictional bio (that someone will either copy from somewhere else, or actually write and then got it stolen) and images again that you may have to pull if the rights owners demand it of you. No quotes, nothing else. No way to link relations with another character etc... I'm sure it's on the list to expand on them but it's not there yet and i'm sure there are other stuff that are to be priorities.

Tonks wrote:
1 - And a nurse is going to be popular because she appears in every episode of a show or a cop ? That makes no sense to me. I get this logic for search engines but we're talking what are supposed to be static pages... we're talking about shows, characters' guides on shows.
2 - Gadfly already covered it all
There are ways to do this : have an option "verified credit order" like imdb does or have editors... Not all editors will do it, but most will. Or both... You will always have people who will correct stuff anyways. .

To me, it looks like you're applying a search logic to static pages and those are two different beasts.
You also said what a nightmare it would be to have all guest in the main episode page while you have that gigornomous trailer window, no other info (no quotes, no cultural references, no possibility of adding the songs), so i'm not seeing the real problem here, i'm seeing a huge trailer, which could be divided by at least 1/3 of its size. Imdb looks to be doing fine and that is exactly what they do ;)If you go to the guest cast page to get all, it's the same except we don't have that huge trailer. And not all people have images, for those that don't, it should be a simple line with the character's name and that will mostly happen to co-guest stars. Overall, we don't need them across board, having an option not to create a characters' guide when we know that it will never be useful is reasonable.

I'm not dissing characters' guide for the sake of dissing them. But the only thing on a characters' page is maybe an image from a show that you know you may be forced to pull because of copyright (which is a problem) and a fictional bio (that someone will either copy from somewhere else, or actually write and then got it stolen) and images again that you may have to pull if the rights owners demand it of you. No quotes, nothing else. No way to link relations with another character etc... I'm sure it's on the list to expand on them but it's not there yet and i'm sure there are other stuff that are to be priorities.

I think the size of the trailer really depends on personal preferences, so far two users have complained about it being too big, if the amount would rise to a higher number, I would come to think that we might change this, but we cnanot change all things that 2 or 3 persons do not like, then we would get a "change war", as then the next two or three users come here and tell us, why are the trailers so small now.

And I think we have said it numerous times, that we will look into the cast sorting, please have alittle patience on this, the things david and jan are workign on right now have a higher priority as more users want it.

About the nurse, that would only happen if it is the same nurse (charatcer/actor) on all episodes, and if a nurse appears in 200 episodes, she kind of is an important part of the show :)

cheers
Juan

Tonks wrote:
I'm not dissing characters' guide for the sake of dissing them. But the only thing on a characters' page is maybe an image from a show that you know you may be forced to pull because of copyright (which is a problem) and a fictional bio (that someone will either copy from somewhere else, or actually write and then got it stolen) and images again that you may have to pull if the rights owners demand it of you. No quotes, nothing else. No way to link relations with another character etc... I'm sure it's on the list to expand on them but it's not there yet and i'm sure there are other stuff that are to be priorities.

The use of single images from an episode shouldn't normally prove a copyright issue, as it falls under Fair Use. One image out of... over 150,000? from a 60-minute show shouldn't be an issue. Or even ten images.

Actor/character images are a bit more problematic, Staff would have to ask their lawyer on that one. Photo reproduction places like Sam's, Wal-Mart, and Target take a pretty stern view of reproducing copyrighted material.

JuanArango wrote:

I think the size of the trailer really depends on personal preferences, so far two users have complained about it being too big, if the amount would rise to a higher number, I would come to think that we might change this, but we cnanot change all things that 2 or 3 persons do not like, then we would get a "change war", as then the next two or three users come here and tell us, why are the trailers so small now.

Roughly how many people have to be interested for it to go up for vote?

Also, keep in mind the nature of the complaint. I can't speak for anyone else, but my complaint isn't that the trailer is too big. It's the fact that the trailer is too big and gets in the way of me contributing. Since the majority of users either don't submit, or don't submit much, of course you're going to get less complaints about trailers.

You're never going to get as many complaints about submission-related issues as non-submission-related issues. Most casual visitors think that magic pixies enter the information at 2 in the morning. :) Or the HAL 2000 is chugging away providing everything that they want.

But... TVMaze like any volunteer TV database seems to live or die based on contributions.

I'm not saying do everything that contributors want. Although that'd be nice... :) But it presumably is more than just numbers. Even if the trailer "just" increases my submission time by a third for newer shows, which is the bulk of my current work... wouldn't it be better if contributors were submitting a third as much for new shows?

JuanArango wrote:

About the nurse, that would only happen if it is the same nurse (charatcer/actor) on all episodes, and if a nurse appears in 200 episodes, she kind of is an important part of the show :)
cheers
Juan

I'd have to disagree with this one. For instance, Bobbin Bergstrom played a nurse on House and was in over 130 episodes. Even though 99% of the time she had no dialogue and was barely visible. I suspect sometimes she didn't appear at all, but there she was in the end co-star credits. She just got a credit because a) she was the show's medical adviser, and b) she had a good casting agent.

But in no meaningful sense was the character "important" to the show.

There's probably some ICU Nurse or FBI Tech or EMT that appeared in 100+ episodes somewhere that was important to the show. But in every instance I've seen, we're talking nameless/generic characters who are buried in the end credits and only get a nod because of the SAG. If they're even remotely important, they get names and storylines. See Morn on Deep Space Nine for one example.

Gadfly wrote:
I'd have to disagree with this one. For instance, Bobbin Bergstrom played a nurse on House and was in over 130 episodes. Even though 99% of the time she had no dialogue and was barely visible. I suspect sometimes she didn't appear at all, but there she was in the end co-star credits. She just got a credit because a) she was the show's medical adviser, and b) she had a good casting agent.
But in no meaningful sense was the character "important" to the show.
There's probably some ICU Nurse or FBI Tech or EMT that appeared in 100+ episodes somewhere that was important to the show. But in every instance I've seen, we're talking nameless/generic characters who are buried in the end credits and only get a nod because of the SAG. If they're even remotely important, they get names and storylines. See Morn on Deep Space Nine for one example.

Of course there are always exceptions to every rule, but if she was credited in the end credits she belongs to the guest star list :)

cheers
Juan

Gadfly wrote:
Roughly how many people have to be interested for it to go up for vote?
Also, keep in mind the nature of the complaint. I can't speak for anyone else, but my complaint isn't that the trailer is too big. It's the fact that the trailer is too big and gets in the way of me contributing. Since the majority of users either don't submit, or don't submit much, of course you're going to get less complaints about trailers.
You're never going to get as many complaints about submission-related issues as non-submission-related issues. Most casual visitors think that magic pixies enter the information at 2 in the morning. :) Or the HAL 2000 is chugging away providing everything that they want.
But... TVMaze like any volunteer TV database seems to live or die based on contributions.
I'm not saying do everything that contributors want. Although that'd be nice... :) But it presumably is more than just numbers. Even if the trailer "just" increases my submission time by a third for newer shows, which is the bulk of my current work... wouldn't it be better if contributors were submitting a third as much for new shows?

I do not know the exact number of people needed to get a subject up for voting, david or jan have to answer this.

Well, we have a pretty decent amount or regular contributors meanwhile, some are also engaged in the forums here some are silently contributing day by day.

My personal opinion is that if two people of the thousands visiting tvmaze daily are saying that the trailers are too big is no reason to even think about makiing the trailer smaller, if we would think about and change stuff that 2 out of thousands are not fine with, we could close down the site, as we would have the biggest change back and forth war in internet history :)

And in general people complain much faster than they say that something is great, which even makes me more say that no one besides you and Tonks (I think he was saying it too), are not fine with the trailer size.

If for example 10-20 regular contributors would say they are harmed contributing by the size of the trailer, then i would start thinking about this, but so far you are the only contributor even mentioning this :)

cheers
Juan

"They" also say that only one person out of ten who is unhappy with something takes the time to complain about it, too. :)