|
|
Welcome to the Database Correction page. This page is for letting me or the other editors know of corrections that need to be made. Please read the posting instructions carefully.
|
|
| Thursday September 30 00:02:45 2004 Re: Eject Rookies Question? |
| Sorry this taking abit, as search feature off-line and not able to bring up 2001 & 2002 Discussion Page Posts. Relate what I have, decide if want Navy NCIS daughter well as these ejected: Starts here, when asking about recent entries. Requested that almost all of the entries be ejected due to similar concerns as Navy NCIS entry: Then the problem one: Record number: 5459 Title: Full House Medium: TV Series Actress: Candace Cameron, Jodie Sweetin Description: Episode: "Blast from Past" (2.41) Kimmy (Andrea Barber) want to become a magician and ask for assistance from DJ (Cameron) and Stephanie (Sweetin). They try a handcuff trick. Kimmy use a REAL handcuff and put it on DJ & Stephanie hand. Unfortunately Kimmy forgot that her parent got the key and they are on vacation for several days. DJ and Stephanie spend half the episode handcuffed to each other. Keep in mind, this one went in around 2001, where others went in rapid Oct 2002. So unable to go check air-sched to see if our friend here goofing on supposed Bob Saget's John Willie style Cross-Dress bound with cuffs scene by a gang of women. Also, back then just starting to notice normally non-contributing posters started "contributing" right after an "Off-Topic" argument got acid on Discussion Page. Not seeing the show myself, rather someone whom has decide if should be ejected, or not. |
| Jay L |
| Thursday September 30 00:35:31 2004 Re: Eject Rookies Question? |
| Jay L wrote:
> Not seeing the show myself, rather someone whom has decide if should be ejected, or not. > Well, there's nothing to flush here ... as I retooled the entry. As for the overarching issue ... I think there may be room for flexibility, but in this instance I can't see any reason for it. Unless Brian's not copasetic with leaving out the info in question, let's move on to pastures new, eh? |
| Biff |
| Thursday September 30 01:26:10 2004 Re: Eject Rookies Question? |
| Biff wrote:
> Unless Brian's not copasetic with > leaving out the info in question As the person in question was such a minor part of the scene, I don't have a strong feeling. It's not a general policy to avoid such things, but to de-emphasize the problem area. |
| Brian R |
| Thursday September 30 03:10:10 2004 Re: Eject Rookies Question? |
| Biff wrote:
> Well, there's nothing to flush here ... as I retooled the > entry. What the Navy NCS one? I don't intend to touch it at all. I just threw up ones from the Bitch list whilst the topic. |
| Jay L |
| Thursday September 30 12:08:19 2004 Re: Brian- Rookies |
| "I don't have a strong feeling. It's not a general
policy to avoid such things, but to de-emphasize the
problem area." What we've been going with more is fellas opposed aren't obligated to contribute them. Aware of quite afew like that. But I haven't touched ones which entered. Figured this fair, as avoids "How come my entry edited but not these ones?" complaints. For Record: Here what I feel about this, here the two previous entries: Record number: 10169 Title: Navy NCIS: Naval Criminal Investigative Service Medium: TV Series Actress: Sasha Alexander Description: Episode: "UnSEALed" (1.18) ___________________ Record number: 10527 Title: Navy NCIS: Naval Criminal Investigative Service Medium: TV Series Actress: Sasha Alexander Description: Episode: "Reveille" (1.23) _______________ And here the entry in question: Record number: 10787 Title: navy ncis Medium: TV Series Actress: two unknowns Description: Episode: see no evil ______________ Doesn't line up with previous ones for the Search, and likely would have been pulled. So technically Biff's entry to post however he feels correct. This harsher than allowing for all of entries concered to be discussed, (like Valerie Bure's wife), but is also fair too, correct? |
| Jay L |
| Thursday September 30 13:45:25 2004 Re: Eject Rookies Question? |
| Jay L wrote:
> What the Navy NCS one? I don't intend to touch it at > all. > I meant there was no need to worry about flushing the original entry, as I'd fixed the defects ... along with rewriting it and omitting the references to the daughter. The only residue left from the original is the record number, really. If you ever see the ep, let me know if you think there's any need to include mention of the daughter. Hopefully you'll suss why I decided to leave it out. |
| Biff |
| Thursday September 30 21:48:52 2004 McLeod's Daughters |
| I've put in two placeholder entries for the ones we know about, with sketchy information. That will at least help with Canadian alerts. We can fill them out as they air.
|
| Brian R |
| Thursday September 30 23:06:06 2004 Re: Eject Rookies Question? |
| Biff wrote:
> If you ever see the ep, let me know if you think there's any need to include mention of the daughter. Hopefully you'll suss why I decided to leave it out. __________ Your word on it good enough. |
| Jay L |
| Thursday September 30 23:29:56 2004 Re: Brian R Post- Mcleod's Daughters |
| "I've put in two placeholder entries for the ones we know about, with sketchy information. That will at least help with Canadian alerts. We can fill them out as they air." Record number: 10791 Title: McLeod's Daughters Medium: TV Series Actress: Bridie Carter, Simmone Mackinnon Description: Episode: Jack of all Shades #77 (4.3) Tess (Carter) comes to realize that a supposed long-lost relative is running a con, so he grabs her and ties her up leaving her in the nursery as he searches for the money he is after. He doesn't count on Stevie (Mackinnon) being in the house and after Tess' cries alert her to the danger she is also dragged into the nursery when she comes to the rescue. The two are tied up with hands behind their backs, and ropes wound around legs and lower body. The are gagged with thick white cleaves. They eventually untie themselves. Based on episode information and single cap. __________________ Editor Note: Entry been corrected for the search feature. I've also sent an email to the Moderator requesting he deal with this character. |
| Jay L |
|
|