You're both such stalkers.

On Friday, April 18th 2008 11:27 pm, Ryan wrote:

You're both such stalkers.

You already knew that. LOL

Maybe on featured guides, it shows the editor when the show became featured?

On Saturday, April 19th 2008 7:59 pm, andrew wrote:

Maybe on featured guides, it shows the editor when the show became featured?

I think it already does.

I would appreciate it if the xml feeds perhaps contained more data and aswell as the specials for a particular show?
For the more data it would be nice to have a summary of it and perhaps an image.
--kodmaster

On Saturday, April 19th 2008 8:59 pm, MarvelGreenDay wrote:

On Saturday, April 19th 2008 7:59 pm, andrew wrote: Maybe on featured guides, it shows the editor when the show became featured? I think it already does.

Just the current editor, which is exactly my point.

Why can't the Search function be updated to look for real birth name? Some actors, actresses, singers etc. are listed on the site under their real birth name but if you do not know that you may be looking for them under an AKA that is not on the site yet?

If you do not find them under any aka's you are prone to add them on the site and if they are here it becomes a duplicate that must later be removed by someone else who finds it by accident.

If the person adding the actor by the name they believe it should be under adds their real birth name as a part of the add then it is so much easier to find duplicates this way.


Example – Let’s just say that (hypothetically speaking of course) John Wayne was on the site as John Wayne as he is and should be. But someone maybe 18 never heard of John Wayne (kind of absurd I know but like I said hypothetically speaking) they somehow put in his real birth name “Marion Robert Morrison” to search for him (why, I don’t know this is just an example). They don’t find him because the site does not search for a person’s real birth names and if the real birth name is not listed here as an aka, the person may never find this actor?

If you put in “John Wayne” you find him.

If you put in aka “Duke Morrison” you find him.

If you put in aka “Michael Morris” you find him.

If you put in his real birth name “Marion Robert Morrison” the site does not find him because it does not search on real birth name.

I had better examples of this problem in the past but I can no longer find them, sorry. I hope this makes sense?



Lastly while I am on the subject of the site search. Does the site have a value or whatever it is called to use to search for someone if you do not know the correct spelling of their last name? Maybe like an asterisk (*) or something?

I put in John W and it brought up a few thousand but when I put in John Wa it took me to someone named “Michael John Warren”.

I wanted the search list to come up again but with a lot less names to look through so I tried John Wa* but same thing happened.

If the site does not have one can we add that onto the to do list for the far future as a helpful search hint?

Thanks for reading, I hope this was as "Clear as Mud"?, Ron

I think the Full Name in the search function would be very, very useful. It would help prevent duplicates, because some actors might start out with their real name, but change their name for whatever reason, and the old name isn't added as an aka.

I never heard of the asterisk thing, but it sounds pretty neat. If you mispell a name, it gives you back names far from the real one, so I think your idea would be great.

Also, I thought what you said make sense (except the part of somebody NOT knowing who John Wayne was.. That would be unbelievable)

After searching 'John Wayne' in the People search, the first name that pops up in Johnny Wayne, with John Wayne second. Shouldn't the exact result be on top?

For the spouse feature, when you add an actor(ess) to a person profile, it should appear the opposite way on the other guide you're linking to, instead having to manually add it to both yourself.

I dunno if this has been suggested, but I think we should have the option of having a pop-up dialog when we get a PM. The number at the top sometimes just isn't enough.

On Friday, May 2nd 2008 7:48 pm, SultanPeppershaker wrote:

I dunno if this has been suggested, but I think we should have the option of having a pop-up dialog when we get a PM. The number at the top sometimes just isn't enough.

Define "pop-up." Because if it's what I'm thinking of, my Firefox browser would block it. I do like the idea though. Not that I normally miss messages but something more can't hurt.

On Friday, May 2nd 2008 8:04 pm, Ryan wrote:

Define "pop-up." Because if it's what I'm thinking of, my Firefox browser would block it. I do like the idea though. Not that I normally miss messages but something more can't hurt.

Meh, just this little dialog box... I know there are a few sites that use it, and my pop-up blocker doesn't seem to block those... Ideally just an alert box something like this that would show up after a new message comes in.

On Friday, May 2nd 2008 8:08 pm, SultanPeppershaker wrote:

On Friday, May 2nd 2008 8:04 pm, Ryan wrote: Define "pop-up." Because if it's what I'm thinking of, my Firefox browser would block it. I do like the idea though. Not that I normally miss messages but something more can't hurt. Meh, just this little dialog box... I know there are a few sites that use it, and my pop-up blocker doesn't seem to block those... Ideally just an alert box something like this that would show up after a new message comes in.

On another site, there is a sound that plays (which you can turn off, of course) each time you load a page when you've got new PMs. I can be a *ding* or other sounds, like an arrow getting stuck into a tree. ("Message for you, sir").

I'd rather have the popup than the sound, as I keep my computer muted most of the time. Loud computer distracts me from the TV.

I do love the notification idea, though.