Please provide the field in the form, or DON NOT PUNISH contributors

  • 3
  • Question
  • Updated 3 months ago
  • Answered
  • (Edited)
It's more than a month since the moment when I contributed these:
#190414-202525-173000
#190414-203008-322000
both were approved and went live for weeks.

Now I see them both declined for one and the same reason:


What's "Not specified"???

If I should, moreover wanted to, specify the place in sequence where the words sound, there is NO field for this in the form:


If an editor may not specify any reasons... well maybe it would be honest to accept all the contributions through GS, in the form of posting tickets here?

Or should we play penguins having a perpetual re-check for all our contributions?
Photo of MAthePA

MAthePA

  • 1918 Posts
  • 3286 Reply Likes
  • VERY DISappointed

Posted 3 months ago

  • 3
Photo of Peter

Peter, Champion

  • 6284 Posts
  • 7510 Reply Likes
Is the data still live on the page?
Photo of MAthePA

MAthePA

  • 1918 Posts
  • 3286 Reply Likes
No.
I had some cases when my submissions declined but actually accepted.
But this post is only for those that are actually declined after been live for weeks.
(Edited)
Photo of Peter

Peter, Champion

  • 6284 Posts
  • 7510 Reply Likes
Someone else may have deleted it, which makes it display as declined in your history.
Photo of MAthePA

MAthePA

  • 1918 Posts
  • 3286 Reply Likes
As Official reps explained earlier on other cases, when someone makes a contribution opposite to yours then status of your contribution does not change on your history page.
Photo of Peter

Peter, Champion

  • 6284 Posts
  • 7510 Reply Likes
Well, sometimes they do.
Photo of Eboy

Eboy

  • 1515 Posts
  • 1883 Reply Likes
This is interesting question, since I personally rarely add (e.g.) English if only a few words are spoken in that language. Where the line is drawn, that would be my question?

I mean if some youth is saying ”s***t” a few times in a Swedish film, does that count?
Photo of MAthePA

MAthePA

  • 1918 Posts
  • 3286 Reply Likes
Eboy, thank you for support and the interest shown on this matter, but please start a new topic on 2nd languages to discuss specifically. I am more troubled with the silent post-factum editions that ruin the previous efforts and enforce me to spend a lot of additional time to control, or just making me understand that the efforts are not desired.

I can hardly imagine a contributor who would not care if the efforts make any sense.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 14426 Posts
  • 16457 Reply Likes
And for anyone that cares S***t is a French word!
Photo of Michelle

Michelle, Official Rep

  • 12520 Posts
  • 9217 Reply Likes
Hi MAthePA -

As Peter mentioned above, if the data in the submission has been approved but is later removed, the submission status will show as "Declined".  The reason will display as "unspecified" because the notification is automatic and triggered by the removal of the data.

In most cases, when data has been rejected by an editor there will be a reason displayed on the submission tracking page.
(Edited)
Photo of MAthePA

MAthePA

  • 1918 Posts
  • 3286 Reply Likes
Michelle, thank you for explanation. 
It would be really great if the system provided a short description similar to "re-contributed". But for future I'll be happy each time to know that this is the way how such situations are indicated.

After your answer, it seems that another contributor has started a silent war of edits. Could you please explain here the policy of IMDb for such situations, and why I am in fact obliged to prove more than another person who proved nothing?
Photo of Peter

Peter, Champion

  • 6284 Posts
  • 7510 Reply Likes
The other contributor would at least have to write an explanation for deleting the language entry.

But if you still believe the data to be correct it is reasonable to ask why it was removed, and you can post any explanation or evidence you may have.
Photo of MAthePA

MAthePA

  • 1918 Posts
  • 3286 Reply Likes
MichellePeter, or other official reps and champions, it seems that another contributor has started a silent war of edits. Could you please explain here the policy of IMDb for such situations, and why I am in fact obliged to prove more than another person who proved nothing?

Thank you in advance
(Edited)
Photo of Joel

Joel, Employee

  • 918 Posts
  • 1094 Reply Likes
Hi,

Thanks for your response.

If you can provide further information into these silent edits, our editors can review these changes and see if they warrant further investigation.

Joel 
Photo of MAthePA

MAthePA

  • 1918 Posts
  • 3286 Reply Likes
Joel, thank you for participating.
There is a short summary of 'previous episodes': 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
It's more than a month since the moment when I contributed these:
#190414-202525-173000
#190414-203008-322000
both were approved and went live for weeks.

Now I see them both declined for one and the same reason: "Reason: Not specified".

Since the moment of the approval, nothing has changed in the factual data provided as evidence.

Michelle explains that the "Not specified" should be resulted from an automatic removal of the data, because in most cases, when data has been rejected by an editor, there will be a reason displayed on the submission tracking page.

Following her explanation, my contributions was automatically removed after another contributor submitted an opposite; or an editor rejected them much later having no new data for this and providing no reasons.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Joel, how can I "provide the further information into these silent edits" if I am not a staff-member to look deeper into? It's me who is expecting the further information from the staff. 

Or if this can not be detailed (though no reasonable grounds for this), or if the staff is not able or allowed to provide, it would be great to know the policy of IMDb for regulating or preventing the problems that may occur when war of edits started.

Or, if it was a mistake or an intention of a staff member, please explain why I am in fact obliged to prove more than another contributor who proved nothing?

What can I do more to help the IMDb staff to help me in this situation, as well as to help others to prevent such situations in future?

Thank you
Photo of Will

Will, Official Rep

  • 3691 Posts
  • 4559 Reply Likes
Hi MAthePA,

I can see that this is linked to the other Get Satisfaction thread - https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/topics/imdb-staff-declined-a-couple-of-my-updates-regarding-russian-ukrainain-mini-series-movies-credits?topic-reply-list[settings][filter_by]=all&topic-reply-list[settings][reply_id]=20087176#reply_20087176

So to confirm were English and Ukrainian spoken during Kanikuly or was it just on screen text? Is that the same with Gámer?
Photo of MAthePA

MAthePA

  • 1918 Posts
  • 3286 Reply Likes
Hi, Will.

Since you keep ignoring the questions of mine in the mentioned thread, and asking me for related additional data but in current thread, I provide here the evidence that English is the second language in Gámer (the two largest segments):
The above evidence could be provided in the submission form for the second language, but there is no such field (when adding language). The above evidence could also be provided in the thread mentioned by you, but nobody asked for this while the thread had been linked as evidential place for correcting the main language (not adding the second one).

Will, in view of the above: I am glad to answer the related questions in that thread (in spite of the fact that after my submissions were approved it costs me the same time twice to rewatch them again); but in current thread please participate on the more general questions that arise more and more with each 'no answer' from editors.

Thank you
Photo of Michelle

Michelle, Official Rep

  • 12520 Posts
  • 9217 Reply Likes
Hi MAthePA -

Thanks for posting the links to the video clips, I have now approved the English language for this title and it should be updated on the site shortly.
Photo of MAthePA

MAthePA

  • 1918 Posts
  • 3286 Reply Likes
Thank you, Michelle.

(It's great. They silently agreed that field in the form would be helpful in providing the evidential links )