Quote:
Originally Posted by ponky
However, I do not see point of use XNK (or similar) number as final answer in ID requests.
|
Well, it will be the final answer if nothing ever follows it up. Even if a name is found that may not be final, because we may find that name later to be a one-off that needs replacing with another name. I myself have openend quite a few named threats on VEF that were later be bolted on to another thread where that model had a more established name.
Quote:
|
My opinion is that XNK number can be one of additional guideposts but not solving solution; often databases have, by mistake, ever multiple profiles with names for some models - so what can we expect for XNK pages?
|
We can expect even more multiple profiles for the same models, but there's nothing wrong with that: these are by definition lesser known models, so the multiplicity is harder to detect. Preventing multiplicities upfront is nigh impossible; it's much more productive to allow them, but to have a system in place to report and correct them.
In the heyday of egafd, whenever a new bunch of unknowns were entered to the database, the regulars would sift through the new candidates and report back when either a new XNK was actually known, or equal to an earlier XNK. We had our own specialist areas (mine was early German sex films), and egafd would in some cases mail the respective specialists beforehand to check over the planned update before it went live. In egafd's XNK system, the identification of two XNKs with one another was effectively a solve like any other, because in either case it meant that one XNK was removed from the system, and in either case this was indicated with an according forward pointer in their solved list, to either another name or another xnk. The identification of two XNKs is similar to identifying a new unknown with a box entry on VEF, except that we do not number our unknowns (they have postids though) and that we do not keep a solved-list either.