egafd.com

Effect? Please do tell.

Well....it's a bloody [and I use the sanguine qualifier advisedly] great
"Approved" stamp, isn't it? Kinda hard to miss, I'd have thought...
... at least, I noticed it, and I'm far from being the sharpest thorn
on the rose-bush.

On a serious note it's useful as an indicator of the degree of confidence
one can place on the data.

jj wrote:
>
> On a serious note it's useful as an indicator of the degree of
> confidence
> one can place on the data.

Well yes, that's part of why we started doing this.
And we are rather careful with tagging a title as "complete". Two conditions have to be met:
1) The data has to be complete, of course. This means every actor is accounted for. Credited names, sex notes, runtime, scene breakdown, ... everything has to be known. For instance, Desperate Mothers and Wives 6 has not been marked as complete, becuase we don't have names/aliases for the 2 nonsex performers.
2) The data has to be personally verified. Only titles which we have seen ourselves can be marked as Complete. IOW, we trust nobody except ourselves !adolf! (<--- hey, he's back again). Seriously, we will mark no title as complete just by relying on secondary sources.

The main reason we started tagging titles as "complete" is for internal use however. It stops admin X from 'correcting' a title based on user submissions, when admin Y has already personally verified all the data as complete himself (still no female admins !glum!).

She's also in Precious Pink 10, scene 4 [again as Sandy].