Incorrect celebrity height listings

  • 4
  • Question
  • Updated 7 months ago
  • Answered
Hi, I tried to update heights for Idris Elba, Brendan Fraser, Jim Carrey, Gustaf Skarsgard, Bill Nighy, John Travolta and Arnold Schwarzenegger. I have plenty of evidence to prove the current listings for these celebrities are wrong and submitted the updates but still, they have not been changed. I simply don’t understand why they would believe the current listings are factual but when you look at photos at them with other celebrities and see their own claims, they obviously are not factual.
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
  • I am frustrated after 7 days, they still have not updated these heights even though I have evidence to prove they are incorrect

Posted 9 months ago

  • 4
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 15398 Posts
  • 17578 Reply Likes
Could you post here your 18 digit contribution #'s
Thanks
Cheers
Photo of Steve Crook

Steve Crook, Champion

  • 1377 Posts
  • 1737 Reply Likes
Hello Ian,
When did you submit them?
What’s the submission reference?

Steve
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
I had just submitted them over a day ago. Some of them I had submitted before several times and waited as long as 7 days but still were not changed. I noticed other celebrity heights I had submitted before were done a day after I had asked for an update.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 15312 Posts
  • 17417 Reply Likes
Please the old submission numbers of the rejected items.
Thanks
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
Idris Elba: 190102-152956-439000
Bill Nighy: 190102-153154-073000
John Travolta: 190102-153436-981000
Arnold Schwarzenegger: 190102-153705-224000
Jim Carrey: 190102-154047-955000
Gustaf Skarsgard: 190102-162642-920000
Brendan Fraser: 190102-172056-060000
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 15312 Posts
  • 17417 Reply Likes
Thanks. An IMDb employee hopefully will give details on these shortly.
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
How long will it take for an IMDB employee to give details? It’s been over two days.
Photo of Will

Will, Official Rep

  • 3787 Posts
  • 4752 Reply Likes
Hi Ian,

Thank you for your message, have you tried resubmitting the change with more evidence in the form of direct links to help verify those changes?

Regards,
Will
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
I just have resended changes to IMDB with direct links to photos and websites that show their claims. I haven’t checked to see if they have changed it yet.
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Incorrect celebrity listings #2.
Photo of Michelle

Michelle, Official Rep

  • 12704 Posts
  • 9577 Reply Likes
Hi Ian -

In order for our staff to check the status, can you post the submission reference numbers associated with the re-submitted items?
(Edited)
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
Bill Nighy is so far the only one that has been changed. Here are the other submission reference numbers that I have resubmitted. 
1. Idris Elba - 190107-163947-233000
2. Brendan Fraser - 190107-162221-590000
3. Jim Carrey - 190107-162944-563000
4. Gustaf Skarsgard - 190107-214437-968000
5. John Travolta - 190107-214728-123000
6. Arnold Schwarzenegger - 190107-215555-761000
Photo of Will

Will, Official Rep

  • 3787 Posts
  • 4752 Reply Likes
Hi Ian,

I can see that those items are still pending, please see the data processing times page for details.

Regards,
Will
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
So all them should be processed within 5 days?
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
Yes Col thank you very much. While I am satisfied Elba, Fraser and Nighy have been changed, I am still puzzled on why they would think Travolta would be 6’ 2” even though he himself claimed to be just over 6 feet and looked a couple inches shorter at least than Samuel L. Jackson. Should I just resubmit them again and find more evidence to prove the current listing is wrong?
Photo of Joel

Joel, Employee

  • 940 Posts
  • 1147 Reply Likes
Hi Ian,

Thanks for your response.

That's right, if a contribution is rejected - the best thing you can do is re-submit the changes with more information to help our editors vet this for you.

Please make sure you provide as much evidence as you can (from reliable sources) and our editors can look into this further for you.

Joel 
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
I'm starting to get really irritated with the editors. I just checked and even though I added more evidence (for John Travolta, I put three links to prove the listing is wrong), they were still declined. I don’t understand, I have photos that shows that the current listing is wrong right there. It makes no sense to me why they would continue to reject it over and over again even though the evidence is right there. Also I noticed some of my earlier contributions have been reverted back to their original listings.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 15056 Posts
  • 17179 Reply Likes
Pictures are not evidence. Forced perspective shots. Camera Angles. Footware. Platform shoes. Actors wearing no shoes for shot framing issues. Standing on uneven surfaces. Sometimes as much as one foot or more. Check out the actual height difference between Gillian Anderson and David Duchovny in long shots. In the close ups she has grown by a foot! Milk Crate acting! So photos can't be proof. The old saying....It's done with mirrors!
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 15056 Posts
  • 17179 Reply Likes
And don't forget, there is no trusted link list. You links may have already been proven to be "Bad" Sources from others submissions..
Photo of Will

Will, Official Rep

  • 3787 Posts
  • 4752 Reply Likes
Hi Ian,

If the item was rejected I suggest following the above advice from Joel and resubmitting the item with further URL evidence from a trusted source.

Regards,
Will
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
They were still declined! I added photos with good camera angles and showing the level of footwear and yet they were still rejected. It makes absolutely no sense to me. And I don’t understand why they would be rejected because if they are bad sources they’re just pictures it’s not like it’s promoting any fake news. For example, look at this photo with John Travolta and David Beckham https://www.shutterstock.com/editoria.... David Beckham is supposed to be like 6 feet and there’s nothing suspicious going on with footwear it looks like and the camera doesn’t seem to be in a bad angle. You seriously think that’s what 6 ft 2 in guy looks like next to someone who’s 6 feet? Plus here is John Travolta with someone who actually is 6 ft 2 in, Hugh Jackman https://www.alamy.com/hugh-jackman-jo.... Sure Jackman is wearing a boot but even if he wasn’t, he would be almost 2 inches taller there. Travolta could’ve shrunk a little bit once he got older but 6 ft 2? He looks 6 feet there at the most. Why would they still be declined even though I have the more and more evidence to prove the listing is wrong?
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 15398 Posts
  • 17578 Reply Likes
I tried to explain earlier. Published news articles that list heights are the only credible source. Not published photos. Photos are a bad source. You know as well as I do that one can alter their own height by up to 3 inches by just slouching. I'm 6'1" but if I slouch, I'm 5'10". How do you claim to know if the person in the photo was not slouching? You can't! And neither can IMDb! Accept the rejection and move on.
Thanks
Cheers
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
So if I find the interview where Travolta claimed to be just over 6 feet, is it possible that they could change it? I'm gonna try and give this one last shot and if it doesn't work, I'll be willing to accept the rejection and like you said Ed, I'll move on. Plus I'm actually 6 ft 2.5, I'm a pretty tall guy and Travolta just doesn't give that kind of tall impression to me and so do the others I have requested. Also, Travolta doesn't look to be slouching in any of the photos I provided. 
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 15398 Posts
  • 17578 Reply Likes
Looks are deceiving. Just like the Camera puts on 10 pounds rule.
Remember only "Trusted Sources" will be what IMDb accepts. That usually means "News Partner" accepted. Like The Hollywood Reporter, Variety, AP, UPI, L.A. Times, Boston Globe, Etc. Someones blog won't cut it.
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
Also Ed, I had a few days ago sent this photo of Paul Bettany and Brendan Fraser to IMDB and they changed Fraser’s height http://m.zimbio.com/photos/Brendan+Fr.... Zimbio isn’t on your list, plus they aren’t showing footwear but IMDB accepted anyway but it’s weird how they won’t do it for the others.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 13434 Posts
  • 15342 Reply Likes
Data Editors are overwhelmed with work. Just like an Umpire in Baseball, they miss a few calls now and then.
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
Hey Ed, would this source cut it? https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dail.... Even though you said pictures are a bad source, in every shot whenever they’re standing up straight or not, Daniels always looks an inch taller than Jim Carrey. Plus there is a source called celebheights.com which I find to be Incredibly reliable. The guy who’s in charge of celebheights lists celebrity heights based on photographic evidence and has found numerous articles to figure out how tall these celebrities actually are. Jim Carrey is listed on celebheights as 6’ 1.5” and Daniels is listed as 6’ 2.75” and also is on IMDB.
Photo of Joel Maserat

Joel Maserat

  • 2 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
The best advice is what Joel Official IMDb Employee and Will IMDb Official Rep said,  is to re-submit the changes with more information to help our editors vet this for you.
The rest of the advice is from volunteers on the forum.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 15398 Posts
  • 17578 Reply Likes
Then explain THIS! Jim Carrey IS TALLER. That's why photos ARE A BAD SOURCE

Cult favourite The original film was made in 1994 and has remained one of the most popular comedies of its decade
The guy who’s in charge of celebheights lists celebrity heights based on photographic evidence
His photographic "EVIDENCE" has been "DE-BUNKED"!

Stop with the photo stuff.
IT IS INACCURATE.
(Edited)
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 15398 Posts
  • 17578 Reply Likes
I doubt it.
But if you had several of that type that had all listing the same height, maybe. Best way to find out is make a submission and see if it is accepted. The best are the IMDb news partners.
(Edited)
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
Would Wikipedia cut it as well? Wikipedia actually lists Travolta’s height at 6 feet tall, much to my surprise.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 15398 Posts
  • 17578 Reply Likes
In addendum, but not as a sole source. Wiki is not a favored nation. LOL.
Use as many things as you can find. They had all better match. If you are researching and find 3 of one and 3 of another that be your own approval editor. Don't submit it. Overwhelming proof is better. That is how the news used to get on the air. Not like today. Rumor is news today. Well rumor should not be aired. That stuff is for the National Uninquirer (SIC). Do the submission the old fashioned way. Have multiple verified identical source references. Not "A" reference that fits your fiction.
Facts.
Verified Facts.
6 Ways from Sunday verified facts.
Lots of em, and keep em coming facts.
No photo Zone Facts.
Are We There Yet?
Cheers
Thanks Ian.
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
Thanks Ed for your help. I’ll do what I can and see what happens.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 15398 Posts
  • 17578 Reply Likes
Image result for no problemo bart simpson
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
They were declined still! They’re probably never gonna be accepted again anyway. I’ll let you know if they are anymore celebrity heights that are declined and need correcting.
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
I came across two more declined contributions but it said that it needs attention. What does that mean? Did they not look it over and just declined it anyway?
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 15398 Posts
  • 17578 Reply Likes
Did you provide multiple corroborating sources, or single.
You will need overwhelming evidence to make a change on an established actor or actress to be approved.

Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
I added about 5 sources saying Michael Shannon is 6' 3" not 6' 3.5". Also I had a direct quote from Peter Dinklage saying he is 4' 5" not 4' 4" and I had about 4-5 sources saying he was 4' 5". 
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
Also there aren't a lot of sources that state Shannon's height. Pretty much all of them have him at 6' 3" while 2 or 3 have him at 6' 3.5", IMDB's current listing. I feel more inclined to believe that 6' 3" is probably a more accurate estimate for him. 
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 15398 Posts
  • 17578 Reply Likes
You know the drill.
18 number and your sources posted on a new thread.
Cheers.
I'll look out for the new post.
Also be aware. Because of your rejection rate your submissions may be being scrutinized more.
(Edited)
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
Michael Shannon's 18 number and the sources I used: 190122-215606-907000. https://www.celebheights.com/s/Michael-Shannon-1023.html, http://hollywoodmeasurements.com/actor/michael-shannon-height-weight-body-measurements/, https://marriedwiki.com/wiki/michael-shannon, https://www.celebrityhow.com/michael-shannon/, https://heightline.com/michael-shannon-bio-net-worth-wife/.

Here are Peter Dinklage's: 190122-220237-874000. https://heightline.com/peter-dinklages-height-weight-measurements/, https://starsunfolded.com/peter-dinklage/, https://celebrityinside.com/body-measurements/actor/peter-dinklage-height-weight-shoe-size-age-bio/, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Dinklage.

Also Ed I couldn't find any other sources that said Shannon was 6' 3" except for sources that I thought IMDB would not accept. Also, other sources have him at 6' 2.75" which I think is a bit too short for him. And like I said, only two or three list him at 6' 3.5". There aren't a ton of sources that have a listed height for him so his height is a little all over the place.
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
Hmmm...it was declined. I guess I’ll just resubmit them with the contribution number. However, Col Needham provided with a contribution tracking list so I’m able to see if it was approved or not and why. It said for Michael Shannon “not enough evidence”. If your confused, I am too because those are two incredibly reliable, trustworthy sources I have provided and yet it was still declined.
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
I tried resubmitting it again but it was still declined! This. Is. So. Infuriating! Here is the contribution number: 190127-152649-396000. And this is the reason why it was declined: “not enough evidence”. I did everything you told me to do Ed by adding no photographs and providing big reliable, trustworthy sources yet they were still declined. Even you said those were the kind of sources that would almost guarantee an approval from the editors. Due to my high decline rate from the editors, I’m probably never gonna get an accepted contribution ever again because these editors are so overly picky about what evidence I put on there. It’s like I’m trying to help IMDB by providing more realistic information to the public that’s my main focus as a contributor but the editors keep on thinking this information is “factual” are consistently rejecting my contributions. It’s honestly insulting to me.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 13434 Posts
  • 15342 Reply Likes
Make a new post. Contribution number and repost the 2 sources and ask why they were declined.
You may be getting declined because of your previous track record too.
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
I’m not sure what you mean Ed. Do you mean resubmit it with the submission reference and add the two links and ask why they were declined which is what I did or create a new post here and ask why they were rejected?
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 13434 Posts
  • 15342 Reply Likes
A new one focused on one Contribution number, and the two reference proofs you provided. And of course ask why they were rejected.

(Edited)
Photo of Ian Young

Ian Young

  • 47 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
Did you get my message Ed?
Photo of Will

Will, Official Rep

  • 3787 Posts
  • 4752 Reply Likes
Hi Ian,

Thank you for raising, these sources are more than adequate for the change on Michael Shannon. I've resubmitted that for you now.

Regards,
Will