FYI, they are ordered by weight. Check http://www.tvmaze.com/shows/82/game-of-thrones/cha... for example, the more appearances a character has, the higher up it's listed.
This works for 95% of the shows out there. Only a handful of shows have such dramatic shifts to the main cast that an alternative should perhaps be considered. Another example that comes to mind is seeing the Brodies listed as part of the most important main cast members on http://www.tvmaze.com/shows/7/homeland
david wrote:
FYI, they are ordered by weight. Check http://www.tvmaze.com/shows/82/game-of-thrones/cha... for example, the more appearances a character has, the higher up it's listed.
This works for 95% of the shows out there. Only a handful of shows have such dramatic shifts to the main cast that an alternative should perhaps be considered. Another example that comes to mind is seeing the Brodies listed as one of the most important main cast members on http://www.tvmaze.com/shows/7/homeland
Oops, I haven't noticed that! But even in this case, I'm not sure if this can apply to such a high percentage of shows. I think it may apply where the difference between main and minor characters is really evident, but for older shows with larger cast it can easily return weird things. And it always relies on a really accurate data entry for each episode, which unfortunately is not 100% certain, not yet at least.
For example, in Agents of Shield Coulson is third, and Skye is the last being credited for 1 episode only.
In The Flash Barry is listed fourth, second in the best case scenario, while Wells is the last one being credited for just 1 episode.
Or in Castle, where Castle himself is fourth (again, a joint first, but still), and Gotham where Barbara, Alfred, Bruce and Bullock are in the same position as Gordon.
Sure, we could (and I will certainly do, eventually) update all the episodes to give the correct credits, but this could fix cases like Shield or Flash. Little can be done on Castle or Gotham where minor characters actually have the same episode counting as main ones.
NathanDrake83 wrote:
Yep, I like that! :)
Another thing I'd like to suggest about this, is the possibility to give some ordering cast members, like main/secondary/other, or something like that. Taking again the example of Doctor Who, it's weird to see the companion listed before the Doctor! :D And it could also help until the separation between current and past members is implemented.
I'd advise against secondary and other.... Not that i'm particularly against the idea, but we have that on our site (still) and this is going to be opened to the persons editing the shows, it's going to be an arbitrary decision, so it won't be consistent across board. And because there are no editorship to stop someone from making modifications, this might be a nightmare in the making. (Editorship might be in the pipeline, i'm not saying it's not being considered now that there are so many contributors, just that the last time the topic popped up, tvmaze people were against it)
And this is what happened on our site. I have to underline not to use that category all the time. It's in our tutorials written in bold red so they know and despite that some still uses it. And i also reiterate it privately....
-----------
Also people have a real hard time differenciating between recurring and regular cast. Even people who have been watching shows for like 20 years sometimes ask what's the difference. The vocabulary is ever evolving. For example, fall finale is a new thing and by new, i mean before the end of meaningful sweep weeks (november, february and may), those terms were not used. Same for regular and recurring. It started around 4/5 years ago when LS+3 (wtching same day + 3 days) started to be the norm.
David's system uses "popularity" so it shows inaccurate information like what you just showed. And this is a discussion that has been popping up a lot with no change. Not saying it's not coming, just that since we don't have a clear view of what David and Jan are working on, it feels like we're harping for the same things while they're working on it. And i'm sure it's frustrating for them.
Rage had ranks, but as Gadfly explained the main problem was as soon as you change the ranks between the main cast according to credit order in the opening credits (or even end credits, hbo, showtime tend to have them all at the end for example) to reflect the credit of a specific season, it impacted previous seasons as well. I'm sure there is a better way and David or Jan is/are probably trying to figure it out right now or have/s already found the best solution and it's just a question of time. I suggested check boxes, but i also said i didn't know if it were feasible and only if that didn't impact previous seasons. Because that's the main thing that whatever you do at the show level doesn't impact the episodes themselves (though i haven't see one episode with a main cast listed on the main episode page)
I think that the number of cast displaying on main show page is too low here, and i also think there is no need to have a sub page at episode level for guests but that's me. I'm sure they'll get the better of all the different sites.
idmb used credits order for movies, for shows it's a little murkier. They have a system mixing credit and alphabetical at episode level and at the show level, it's "popularity" which is so bad you have no idea who has been a guest or main cast.
--------------
"Again in DW, the current Doctor is more "important" than the current companion. "
Well they're both in the opening credits, so their value is the same. Granted companions tend to change, but same goes for doctors and some actually argue that it is always about the companion, never about the doctor. I think Doctor Who exists because of its companions. They make him think differently but i understand what you're saying. Ideally, only Capaldi and Coleman should show on the main show page, the others relegated to the sub main cast page... And when we know the identity of her replacement, she should be relegated to sub main cast page.
What should be the final decider is credits, because noone can argue against what is shown on the screen. And it would be also, imo, the simplier solution (and also the best).
Jaguar said "The answer to that question is very easy Juan but you guys won't allow it and that is to allow us to put years in parenthesis to indicate when they were active main cast like this (1999 - 2009) (2015 - present), etc., etc. that would easily resolve the problem. They won't be moved down on the cast list but at least you can spot them right away without having to look at 100's or episodes separately to see if they were there or finding episodes with no cast listed in them?"
I asked why they were against it, Gadfly explained they're not against it per se, they're against it being attached to the characters name, which i totally agree with. Attributes would deal with it. When I asked why, i also took into account it would be done with attributes, i never thought they were talking about attaching it to the character's name. But maybe i was right and gadfly was wrong, i don't know. You seem to have understood it the same i did.
David, sorry, but i can't make short posts in replying to multiple posts. So it's long - again.
NathanDrake83 wrote:
Oops, I haven't noticed that! But even in this case, I'm not sure if this can apply to such a high percentage of shows. I think it may apply where the difference between main and minor characters is really evident, but for older shows with larger cast it can easily return weird things. And it always relies on a really accurate data entry for each episode, which unfortunately is not 100% certain, not yet at least.
For example, in Agents of Shield Coulson is third, and Skye is the last being credited for 1 episode only.
In The Flash Barry is listed fourth, second in the best case scenario, while Wells is the last one being credited for just 1 episode.
Or in Castle, where Castle himself is fourth (again, a joint first, but still), and Gotham where Barbara, Alfred, Bruce and Bullock are in the same position as Gordon.
Sure, we could (and I will certainly do, eventually) update all the episodes to give the correct credits, but this could fix cases like Shield or Flash. Little can be done on Castle or Gotham where minor characters actually have the same episode counting as main ones.
The correct credits are all there, look at Agents of Shield, you have to look at CAST tho, not at characters, if you click on Chloe Bennet: Sky / Daisy there, you will see that she appeared in almost all episodes :)
I think some bug happened there in the characters section, as she was renamed recently from Sky to Sky / Dasy, but david has to answer this one :)
cheers
Juan
@Tonks, I understand what you've said, but in my opinion it's not such a big deal. There's no need to know the difference between regular and recurring, it's obvious that the titular character is more "important" than the others.
Also, I don't think it's strictly necessary the historical order for each season must be maintained. In my opinion, the current one is more than enough.
Quick note on DW: yes, they are both in the opening credits, but Capaldi is the first and Coleman is second, as it always has been with the actors playing the Doctor and the actors/actresses playing the companions. There are several episodes with just the Doctor (in the credits and in the episode), I can't recall any episode with just the companion.
That been said, if admins are already thinking on something else to manage this stuff, or they think the current situation is ok, it's really fine by me, I've just wanted to throw a little suggestion on the matter. I think this site has a great potential and can grow bigger and bigger with the experience coming from all of the new users that found a way here in the last few months, and I'd like to think I'm able to give my little contribution to this. :)
JuanArango wrote:
The correct credits are all there, look at Agents of Shield, you have to look at CAST tho, not at characters, if you click on Chloe Bennet: Sky / Daisy there, you will see that she appeared in almost all episodes :)
I think some bug happened there in the characters section, as she was renamed recently from Sky to Sky / Dasy, but david has to answer this one :)
cheers
Juan
Well, the sorting by episode count is done in the characters page, that's why I'm looking at it. In fact, even in the cast page she's the last one! ;)
NathanDrake83 wrote:
Well, the sorting by episode counting is done in the characters page, that's why I'm looking at it. In fact, even in the cast page she's the last one! ;)
yes, but if you click on the Sky/ dasy character it will show you all the episodes she appeared in, it seems to be a bug that the count is only ONE there :)
cheers
Juan
JuanArango wrote:
yes, but if you click on the Sky/ dasy character it will show you all the episodes she appeared in, it seems to be a bug that the count is only ONE there :)
cheers
Juan
This means there's another issue when changing the name to a character... XD
Anyway, it doesn't change much, Coulson hasn't changed name and he's third... ok, joint first, but still, it's really weird to see him in any different position than absolute first!
NathanDrake83 wrote:
This means there's another issue when changing the name to a character... XD
Anyway, it doesn't change much, Coulson hasn't changed name and he's third... ok, joint first, but still, it's really weird to see him in any different position than absolute first!
yeh , it seems when the character name is changed the count is bugged.
cheers
Juan
david wrote:
Interesting. I suspect it happened during a character merge.
Hey david,
it seems when a character name is changed the count becomes bugged.
If you take a look at Agents of Shield characters:
Sky / Dasy has a count of ONE, tho when you click on the character it shows you all episodes she appeared in, more than 30 or so.
This happens to all characters that are renamed at some point, they seem to lose the count from before the renaming took place.
I think this has nothing to do with merging, definitely not, just with renaming :)
cheers
Juan
eNathanDrake83 wrote:
@Tonks, I understand what you've said, but in my opinion it's not such a big deal. There's no need to know the difference between regular and recurring, it's obvious that the titular character is more "important" than the others.
Strictly speaking, a recurring is just a guest star that appears 2 or more times. A regular is main cast and appears before Guest-star and it falls under starring and/or also starring (your secondary would be that). So yeah, there is a real big difference between the two. And being in the opening credits vs guest / special or co-stars is important as well. Some shows do not differenciate and list the main cast in alphabetical order, others do it by Roll Call, there's no strick rule but the show in question (whatever that show is) should always decide how it appears. You can check jeff lieber's rules as a showrunner, he writes extensively about this stuff if you are interested. (here is the link http://gointothestory.blcklst.com/2013/02/showrunn...)
Regular / recurring is often used by the media, but on networks sites, it's usually cast for main cast. CBS PR uses regular and guest stars for example... But something as clear as main cast and guest stars make it adamantly clear what is what. And avoid confusion. And i know tvmaze people really want to avoid confusion above all else, that's one of their pet peeves and i agree with them even if i don't agree with the words they use sometimes.
Also, I don't think it's strictly necessary the historical order for each season must be maintained. In my opinion, the current one is more than enough.
Well, then if you go back to let's say Grey's anatomy season 1 Ellen pompeo is first (i think), but the others have moved around (i know). So if the main cast has been added at the episode level, it means that if you change it at show level and it impacts all seasons, then you don't have an accurate guide. Which means you're not thinking about accuracy, just having the info there. That's fine, but then, there is no harm in having accurate info, to the contrary. If you're inaccurate, you're cutting yourself from part of the population. Why would you do that ?
And this doesn't take into account people who didn't watch a show when it aired. Let's say you were not around when MASH aired, and you are discovering it today. If you go to season 1 and abide by your system, then you get incorrect info and might not be happy with it. I don't know, it might not be a problem for you, but it will be for people who do the guides here (those that actually do it using the credits on screen and not using imdb to fill the guides fast. Gadfly for example is entering info from reruns of old shows right now per their airing, he's not using imdb).
And let's use Shield as an example : last season, they used to not credit when an actor didn't appear in a specific episode. That's how i knew Dalton wouldn't appear. This year they change the policy. Gregg and Ming-Na might be the most important people, but over all, Gregg was really in the backseat last season, so how can you consider him more important, just because the show was created around his character ? How do you decide what is more important overall. If a show loses its main lead cause s/he decided to leave, you're going to have the same problem.
It's going to be left to the persons editing the shows. So it's going to be subjective and i strongly am against a system that let's people decide who is more important cause it will end in edit wars... But i'm not in the deciding seat, tvmaze people might agree with your views.
--------
But let's not forget the main point, i am all for a display system that only shows the current main cast. And i'd be very happy to have sub pages with seasons as well showing that cast for that specific season. My caveat being i do not want it to impact the episodes. After that, how they do it is beyond my knowledge.
just to be precise, my suggestion to "categorize" main cast members was more an "internal" sorting than something to show on the page, just to force the sorting for some specific characters.
Regarding the difference between regular, recurring, guest and all the others types: of course there's a huge difference! And in fact, I find it's managed quite well here. As said before, that "categorization" I was suggesting would be applied within the regular members only.
About the historical order: sure, the more accurate information are, the better is for everyone. If that can be accomplished, by all means, I would support that! Especially with a page with current main cast, and subpages for each seasons. I'd just don't want the admins to go too crazy on our requests! ;)
NathanDrake83 wrote:
just to be precise, my suggestion to "categorize" main cast members was more an "internal" sorting than something to show on the page, just to force the sorting for some specific characters.
Regarding the difference between regular, recurring, guest and all the others types: of course there's a huge difference! And in fact, I find it's managed quite well here. As said before, that "categorization" I was suggesting would be applied within the regular members only.
About the historical order: sure, the more accurate information are, the better is for everyone. If that can be accomplished, by all means, I would support that! Especially with a page with current main cast, and subpages for each seasons. I'd just don't want the admins to go too crazy on our requests! ;)
Yeah you're talking about ranking. For example shield would have gregg as 1, ming-na as 2, dalton as 3, bennett as 4 etc... (i'm following the credits order) That's what i was also talking about as well. The ranking system can work only if it doesn't impact previous seasons, that's what i'm arguing. it would need a system with sub pages for each season with a different rank attached to it. and that page would rule that specific season episodes. If that would be the solution, that would be great. I have no idea of the feasibility scripting wise.
Their to do list is big as an elephant, so it's manageable :D (just joking, they said it, i thought it was as big as Jupiter :p) But i'm of a mind, if you don't ask, nothing will happen.
I suggested a system for all shows where only the cast member of the current season showed on the main show page (like check boxes or something of the sort, i'm not a developper, so i don't know the best way to script that). Tvtome the ancestor of tvrage/tv.com had it in place, i have never seen it elsewhere since then. It was superb for soaps for example. But i don't remember how it reflected at episodes level. I don't know if Dragen remembers either but i'm pretty sure that's what he was asking.
Tonks wrote:
Yeah you're talking about ranking. For example shield would have gregg as 1, ming-na as 2, dalton as 3, bennett as 4 etc... (i'm following the credits order) That's what i was also talking about as well. The ranking system can work only if it doesn't impact previous seasons, that's what i'm arguing. it would need a system with sub pages for each season with a different rank attached to it. and that page would rule that specific season episodes. If that would be the solution, that would be great. I have no idea of the feasibility scripting wise.
Their to do list is big as an elephant, so it's manageable :D (just joking, they said it, i thought it was as big as Jupiter :p) But i'm of a mind, if you don't ask, nothing will happen.
I suggested a system for all shows where only the cast member of the current season showed on the main show page (like check boxes or something of the sort, i'm not a developper, so i don't know the best way to script that). Tvtome the ancestor of tvrage/tv.com had it in place, i have never seen it elsewhere since then. It was superb for soaps for example. But i don't remember how it reflected at episodes level. I don't know if Dragen remembers either but i'm pretty sure that's what he was asking.
I agree, this would be in the end the best solution, but I am not so sure how quick this is managable for david and jan.
cheers
Juan
Tonks wrote:
Yeah you're talking about ranking. For example shield would have gregg as 1, ming-na as 2, dalton as 3, bennett as 4 etc... (i'm following the credits order) That's what i was also talking about as well. The ranking system can work only if it doesn't impact previous seasons, that's what i'm arguing. it would need a system with sub pages for each season with a different rank attached to it. and that page would rule that specific season episodes. If that would be the solution, that would be great. I have no idea of the feasibility scripting wise.
Their to do list is big as an elephant, so it's manageable :D (just joking, they said it, i thought it was as big as Jupiter :p) But i'm of a mind, if you don't ask, nothing will happen.
I suggested a system for all shows where only the cast member of the current season showed on the main show page (like check boxes or something of the sort, i'm not a developper, so i don't know the best way to script that). Tvtome the ancestor of tvrage/tv.com had it in place, i have never seen it elsewhere since then. It was superb for soaps for example. But i don't remember how it reflected at episodes level. I don't know if Dragen remembers either but i'm pretty sure that's what he was asking.
I agree with almost everything, I just don't see the absolute and mandatory need to avoid impact on previous seasons. Certainly a nice-to-have, certainly an increase of accuracy of data, but I would totally be fine without it.
But again, that's just me. :)
JuanArango wrote:
Hey david,
it seems when a character name is changed the count becomes bugged.
If you take a look at Agents of Shield characters:
Sky / Dasy has a count of ONE, tho when you click on the character it shows you all episodes she appeared in, more than 30 or so.
This happens to all characters that are renamed at some point, they seem to lose the count from before the renaming took place.
I think this has nothing to do with merging, definitely not, just with renaming :)
cheers
Juan
It's not because of renaming
It's because of creating a new character, that's where the bug happens
If you manually delete the appearance and then create the appearance again, it's fixed
MichaelDeBoey wrote:
It's not because of renaming
It's because of creating a new character, that's where the bug happens
If you manually delete the appearance and then create the appearance again, it's fixed
Ohhh, good catch :)
I'm pretty sure it happened after a merge, but maybe we'll never know :-) I've fixed it for Agents of Shield, if there are any more shows where you see this problem let me know.
On topic: I'll be sure to read all your comments when we get around to working on this part. :)
