IMDb v/s Wikipedia.

[trekkiedane]

I have noticed that the kind of information I'd like to get about a TV series (or a single episode) or a film is A LOT better on Wikipedia than it ever was on IMDb. and that I -now- tend to search there first and only go to IMDb if I don't find what I'm looking for on Wikipedia (or by simple googeling).

What irritates me the most is the top of the IMDb page: no matter what you've searched for it's a banner of people, dressed in evening wear, standing on a red carpet

How about you? -what do you hate the most about IMDb and where do you go for information that you are supposed to be able to find there?

 

[CorporalClegg]

I use both.

In either case the information can be hit or miss. I've even seen instances where BOTH were wrong.

 

[Eric Cheung]

It depends, but usually Wikipedia. It's better at placing the movie or TV show in a cultural context and giving a summary of what it was about. With IMDB, you have to click between different pages, or the User Comments, to get an idea of what the show was really like.

IMDB tends to be better for trying to figure out who worked on a particular production, or what they've done since, what they look like now, etc. That's largely because IMDB is focused on rating productions and on being a tool for people in the industry to network.

 

[Mr Light]

Wikipedia first, then IMDB for complete and accurate information

 

[Locutus of Bored]

I usually go to Wikipedia for:

- Plot summaries
- Overview of critical and popular reception
- Controversies
- References made in or about the subject
- Production history

While I go to IMDB for:

- Cast & crew filmographies
- Quotes
- Mistakes
- Budget and box office
- Trivia

Though, on IMDB more than Wikipedia, you have to take the trivia and mistakes with a grain of salt unless you can confirm them elsewhere. Wiki at least generally requires a source for the info to be listed.

 

[Mr. B]

I almost never use IMDb for TV series but it's indispensable for movies. The info I'm usually interested in on movies is very easy to find since every listing is formatted identically. Wikipedia can be useful for trivia fluff and background information, though.

 

[Jono]

Wikipedia is far better in terms of info on films and TV series than IMDB. I do find that IMDb is a far better location when you want to see an actor's credits as wikipedia for the most part will only have a "select" filmography, so I tend to jump off the imdb links in actor articles on wikipedia to look through that.

IMDb does have a place for people to put personal views on aspects of the films, which sometimes (very rarely) can be useful. Also it lists similar films that can be fun to explore.

 

[Amaris]

I usually go to Wikipedia for:

- Plot summaries
- Overview of critical and popular reception
- Controversies
- References made in or about the subject
- Production history

While I go to IMDB for:

- Cast & crew filmographies
- Quotes
- Mistakes
- Budget and box office
- Trivia

Though, on IMDB more than Wikipedia, you have to take the trivia and mistakes with a grain of salt unless you can confirm them elsewhere. Wiki at least generally requires a source for the info to be listed.

I do the exact same thing.
Of course, I love going to IMDB to read the fora. You ever wonder if "WonderPets" the TV series generates controversy?

The answer is yes.

J.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

You ever wonder if "WonderPets" the TV series generates controversy?

Have I? It's questions like that that haunt my dreams and turn my waking hours into a living Hell, J.

 

[Amaris]

You ever wonder if "WonderPets" the TV series generates controversy?

Have I? It's questions like that that haunt my dreams and turn my waking hours into a living Hell, J.

You would not be alone. Believe me, check out "WonderPets" on IMDB sometime. You think you have nightmares now, well buddy I have a surprise for you!


J.

 

[Roger Wilco]

Usually wikipedia, but imdb is useful too.

 

[Zulu Romeo]

Usually both, but first Wikipedia.

Actually, if the show has its own (usually fan-created) Wikia site, I often refer to that too, as quite often those sites are very well maintained, and even more detailed and comprehensive than Wikipedia and IMDB (there are some exceptions). Favourites include Memory Alpha and Lostpedia.

 

[ShamelessMcBundy]

I go to wiki first and then if i don't find anything there, then it's onto IMDB.

 

[trekkiedane]

IMDB tends to be better for trying to figure out who worked on a particular production, or what they've done since, what they look like now, etc. That's largely because IMDB is focused on rating productions and on being a tool for people in the industry to network.

Yep, that's true, I didn't think about the in-site search function when I wrote the OP.

IMDb truly has a lot of searchable people and locations and even quotes.