The Movie Database 支持
支持 → 网站支持
Search Feature Nuance/Subtlety: "Smoking" but not "Smokin"...?
Rishi Ugersain ChopraSTAFFMOD 发布于 2015 年 08 月 18 日 10:14下午
Might there be some reason why a search for the keyword "smokin" would turn up different set of results than "smoking", i.e. a set of results which omits the sequel to the movie which starred Ryan Reynolds)... even though one would expect an original and a sequel of the same name (and spelling) to be displayed consistently between the sets of results (i.e. either both inclusive of the title or both included in one or the other)?
PS: The problem is the same as the problem described at 'https://www.themoviedb.org/talk/5569cea7c3a36875ef001388' but, in this case, the target movie is not an adult movie...
PPS: Although a "wildcard search" might help to avoid the problem it should be noted that discussion regarding the same is already documented at 'https://www.themoviedb.org/talk/5332b78a9251410b4b00326e'.
Rishi Ugersain Chopra 的回复
于 2015 年 08 月 18 日 10:15下午
Further, it should be noted that an attempt to add the movie correctly returns a page indicating existence of a duplicate... though said page includes two (duplicate) links to the same title/title record...
Travis Bell 的回复
于 2015 年 08 月 19 日 11:02上午
Hi idfubar,
For alternative spellings of titles, you should add the missing term as an alternative title. "Smoking Aces" exists on Ryan Reynolds version but not on the sequel. I just added it, you can see here, and it is now showing up in search.
Cheers.
Rishi Ugersain Chopra 的回复
于 2015 年 08 月 22 日 9:01下午
Ah, that is a much better solution than having to argue over the correct title (though, in all fairness, it should be noted that even arriving at an argument can be a bit of a feat; see: 'https://www.themoviedb.org/talk/51c5df49760ee379e406d2f9' & 'https://www.themoviedb.org/talk/51c4fa4119c295789906e39b')...
Not sure if there's another way to verify titles (i.e. aside from attempting to directly query the publishing studio) but even checking between two/three/four sources is not infallible...