Title declined!

  • 2
  • Problem
  • Updated 7 months ago
  • Solved
For some very, very weird reason, the editors/some bot is not letting me add my film to the database. 

I know there was time when I tried adding this film to the database many a times before it even got made and they accepted-declined the requests. 

Now, I have finally made the film and submitted a screener link too but don't know why the request is constantly getting declined. 

Have a look at this: 190123-091758-896000

This is the first of this film's submission with a screener link. But within a few seconds of submission, it said " Your contribution has been declined". Really?

Somebody go and wake them up. The film has been made. I have even share a full length version link with some much more sources but still they're not letting me add it? Have they blacklisted this title or what? I am super enraged by this pathetic behavior. 
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
  • Extremely angry

Posted 7 months ago

  • 2
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
Prashat,

Be sensible: to register a new film, a minimum number of basic information is needed, and you have to read carefully and follow thoroughly the information.
I have not done it myself so I cannot guide you precisely, but there have been several of such cases explained here on GS.

I guess you are aware that you cannot successfully any update to the database unless all submitted sections are green. Was it the case?
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
....

....

....

(Dots of disappointment)

"Be sensible"? 

I couldn't have submitted the update if it wasn't green. I have given each and every thing needed. 
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
OK.
My 2 cents: it is highly likely to be a process or IT issue and not a human error, let alone against you!!

So let us wait for an IMDb staff to look into this. Meredith, from IMDb support in Britain, is obvioulsy around and should be able to review this topic shortly.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
That would be appreciable.
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
Prashat,

Getting back to your request, there is someting to be clarified: how does the system state "Your contribution has been declined" after just a few seconds? I mean, where or how is it displayed on screen?
If it is just after a few second, it cannot have been submitted, i.e. having generated a submission ID that you can trace in your update and contribution histories.

So I still think that you are missing to enter an information requested by the system before being able to submit it.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
Sir, this ain't no joke. 

Few seconds means some 15-20 seconds. 

And how can you even think that it might not have been submitted? I thought you read the post which contained the reference number. 

Only because something is unlikely doesn't mean it can never happen.
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
Prashat,

In 20+years of submissions to IMDb I have never seen a message "Your contribution has been declined" showing in 15-20 seconds. It can be stated in https://contribute.imdb.com/contributions/history, several minutes after submission (alternative titles), more likely in hours or days. And after you have receid an 18 digit submission ID.

I do not pretend to have covered all types of submissions, let alon titles as I mentioned above, but this system behavior is not consistent with all other submission types I am aware of.

Could you share a screen capture where the message appears, while we wait for an IMDb staff to take care of your issue?
(Edited)
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
Thanks Prakash, but the useful information is the one appearing at the bottom after "Reasons" and we can only see the beginning in your screen capture.
What does it say in full?
(Edited)
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
OH!!!!

This is so irritating.

"Your contribution has been declined.Your data referred to another item which has been declined or deleted, and this means that your data will not appear on the site. If you also submitted the original item and believe that it still warrants inclusion, please review the submission guide and resubmit."
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
And why have you changed my name twice?

Firstly you spelled it wrong.

Then you just gave me a new name. What's with that?
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
Really sorry for your name, I used to know a few Prakash in India ;)

OK, I also see that your 61 items have been declined, so some of them must be key, triggering the rejections of the others... So maybe you should review the 61 reasons for rejection and try to point out the key ones.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Wow. I wonder if this was declined in error.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Wow. I wonder if this was declined in error.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
Is someone coming to deal with this or not?
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
an IMDb staff will have come...
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
Yes, somebody came and ruined everything. Great prediction skills, sir!
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
Hey you! Take it down! Immediately take it down!  The screener isn't meant for public viewing! Delete it soon!
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
The way this forum works, anybody who lacks administrative privileges also lacks the technical capability of removing his or her own post once that post is starred or succeeded by a newer post at the same or deeper level.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
The post has been removed now. The posts containing the screenshots of the contribution history in which the URL (to the screener not meant for public viewing) appears should probably be redacted as well, though.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Thanks a lot for letting us know. I feel relieved now :)
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
Why did you do that? The screener was made unlisted so that nobody but the editors see it before release and you... are you out of your mind?
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Hi, Prashast Singh. See: That is a problem you've created for yourself. You supplied a URL to password-unprotected content of the movie as a title URL addition instead of providing the URL to password-protected content, along with the password, in the explanation field of the title creation submission form, where only the IMDb site authorities would be able to see it. When you do it the particular way that you have, the information may be mistaken for publication. Suppose the title creation had been not only approved but also the associated title URL addition. There would be no way for anybody to interpret it as a "mere" private screener, when they visit the External Sites subpage for the movie.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
I'm no popular star to have people visiting my film's page time to time. And to be honest, this is what I have always done to get the rest of my movies listed. You didn't need to share this in public.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
This isn't created by me but you. I'm sorry if I was a little too harsh but this was a common reaction because this shocked me. No one other than me is involved in the making of this indie film. I've always done it easily but sharing it in public has really hindered it big time. Submitting the same submission requests again and again in so painstaking that I got angry. Again, sorry if I hurt you friend. Otherwise you know what caused this turmoil.
(Edited)
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Well, I attribute this to the fact that there are not enough guidelines and also not enough tools concerning these matters.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
I've made it private for now. Delete it soon. If you were sensible enough to find the link, weren't you sensible enough to see the release date? Come on, do it!
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
Only because of you this process might even get slowed down. REMOVE. THE. POST. 

I don't want another rejection to the submission because I won't make it public unless you remove it. 
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Only because of me? I'm not buying the accusation. Repeatedly has it been made clear that this is a public forum.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
What's the problem in deleting the post? Don't tell me it can't be deleted.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Prashast Singh. O, yes, it absolutely can be deleted, just not by you, not by me, not by Vincent Fournols, and not by most of the participants of this forum.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
Huh... As expected. Thanks for sharing the screener link. I'm so happy for this :)
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
The film hasn't been released officially and I was going to remove this screener link as soon as the title page was created. You should have had some sensibility here. Now, will you proceed to remove the post or not? 
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Does everybody remember the exchange that took place at GS topic "Film not video!"?
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
That was a different case. I got tricked. The film wasn't screened due to some unknown reasons and thus I stopped crying for that. But here's a totally different scenario: title's not being accepted, all needed sources are submitted and the film's screener link is... (sigh) I have no problem if this one gets listed as a video but please... plzzzzz... don't do this next time bro. 
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Yes, it is a different case, but therein it was revealed that a "screener" was initially mistaken for an official release.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
What's the point of that here? This is about a different movie. 
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Prashast Singh, it pertains to you, your work, your contributions and IMDb. If we hope to understand why the road has been so rocky, we have to look at related history.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
The road has never been a smooth one for me. But this thing just puts an end to the hours of wait and patience I invested here at this forum. Nothing's gonna happen now. Only if an EDITOR sees it, there's SOME scope that it can get approved because these days they don't clear (my) titles unless I give them screener links. 

Otherwise we know... I know... A rocky road with possibly no end and I will be walking on it without shoes. 
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
Perhaps you don't understand, [https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/people/jeorj_euler] but this has cost me just even beyond IMDb. I had submitted this screener to a film festival and now... so funny, isn't it? 
(Edited)
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Next time, I will inquire about whether a particular URL to a video is intended only as a screener. The recommended way of sharing such URLs is in the explanation fields of the submission form or through the IMDb Contact Us form in the IMDb Help site. They do not belong in the External Sites listing for a movie if they are not intended to stay there.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
Exactly my point, I was gonna delete it after the listing but now... 

Tell me what YOU can do. 
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
So what's the point of this conversation?

Some user already shared a link which almost LEAKS my film due to which I can't make it private and eventually face the rejection stuff once again. 

No satisfaction here. Only if the screener link wasn't shared >:(((((((

This time I AM DISAPPOINTED. I'll have to submit the update possibly once again... but still I'll be submitting the screener for approval and now that there's a link here... 

NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Sometimes it is best to try sorting out problems via the IMDb Contact Us form first.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
And yes, would you please mind me telling how you EXTRACTED the screener link if you have no privileges as you said in a post above?
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
From the screenshot you posted of a web page in your web browser, as requested by Vincent Fournols (who couldn't have known that the screenshot would contain the YouTube URL, and who couldn't have known how other members of the IMDb Community would respond to it):

https://d2r1vs3d9006ap.cloudfront.net/s3_images/1773465/RackMultipart20190123-109530-rfez7p-Screenshot__39__inline.png?1548240860

...and trust me when I tell you that I'm not the most nosy participant of this forum. I'm nevertheless curious about a lot of information that passes through here.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
Now there's only one way.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Prashast Singh, I don't want to be advocate for specific brands over others, but you should consider using Vimeo sometimes instead of YouTube, because Vimeo allows you to tailor control access to your content in more detail, like password-protecting specific video entries you've uploaded. There is also Google Drive and Dropbox. Most importantly, you have to understand that the explanation field found in the submission form is the most appropriate place to include information not intended for publication on IMDb. This is better than providing a "miscellaneous link" to content that you will pull from the particular external site, thus creating a dead hyperlink on IMDb. We do not want dead hyperlinks.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
I thought what I was gonna do might help. Even that has cost me big time. 
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
If some editor with privileges is reading this, I request you to just approve the title addition request. This is... making me tensed and I'm almost about to cry. Just one mistake, that too which is NOT committed by me, I'm gonna lose this round just once again.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 77 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
WHY did I come to this forum where one post is enough to ruin all my hard work?

Huh, that user can't even delete it. I was about to share the link to my friend but now I can't take this risk. 

I lost what I thought was going to be a win for me. Thank you Jeorj Euler. Whether you see it as an accusation or not, and buy it or not, it doesn't bother me. It's YOU who shared the screener link even when no one asked you to. It was UNLISTED, not public. You should have opened the link in a window and seen that. If it was a public link, why won't have I shared it here in the forum myself?

You will have nothing to worry about because you didn't make the film. You don't have to get it released. You have no share in that. 

What a great "satisfaction"???!!! I have sent a message via the contact us page but don't know what will happen. 
(Edited)
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Prashast Singh, you must have misunderstood the possible consequences of posting on this forum, I'm afraid. I apologize.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Glad that you do. My previous original account has also been suspended but no worries, bro. Let's start fresh :) 
Photo of MAthePA

MAthePA

  • 1912 Posts
  • 3279 Reply Likes
All this is a tremendous example of "Tempest in a teapot"
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Great observation. Lies in the eye of the beholder and the withholder. 
Photo of gromit82

gromit82, Champion

  • 7110 Posts
  • 8629 Reply Likes
Prashast: Please post your last full data submission here on this message board. You can copy it out of the receipt you would have received from IMDb by e-mail immediately after sending it in. Some of the regulars on the board may review it and, if they can, they may provide suggestions as to how to improve the submission to get it included in the database.

Note: If there is anything in your data submission that should not be revealed to the general public, you can omit it from the posting here, but please post everything else from the submission.
Photo of Lucy

Lucy

  • 88 Posts
  • 220 Reply Likes
(Edited)
Photo of MAthePA

MAthePA

  • 1907 Posts
  • 3263 Reply Likes
Now I know who was prototyped by The Beatles for their 1967-year famous song.
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
The Beatles released several grand albums in 1967.
But I am afraid this connection is totally useless to this topic
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
What does this mean here?
Photo of Lucy

Lucy

  • 88 Posts
  • 220 Reply Likes
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Hi, Lucy. That's a good point.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
How exactly?
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7154 Posts
  • 9256 Reply Likes
Well, it is a lot easier to work with a movie that has already been published (and so as intended). There are often lots of problems with titles that are "in-development", "pre-production", "filming" or "post-production", or otherwise in a workprint phase, requiring re-shoots or whatever.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
OK, I get that.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7167 Posts
  • 9287 Reply Likes
So, apparently there may now be justification for tt5567060 to be undeleted.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
But instead of undeleting that one, I suggest a new one be created because there have been PLENTY of changes in the film. 
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7167 Posts
  • 9287 Reply Likes
Yeah, but...
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
But what?
Photo of Lucy

Lucy

  • 88 Posts
  • 220 Reply Likes
(Edited)
Photo of Will

Will, Official Rep

  • 3679 Posts
  • 4517 Reply Likes
Hi Prashast,

Please can you try resubmitting the title and let me know the new submission reference and the status of the submission?

Thanks,
Will
(Edited)
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
So sweet... The entire procedure again... thanks a lot for wasting my time.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
190124-120915-000000
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
Prashast, there has been 93 seconds between your two previous post...
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Hehe...
Photo of Michelle

Michelle, Official Rep

  • 12506 Posts
  • 9207 Reply Likes
Hi Prashast -

This is confirmation that the title has now been approved and is listed on the site: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9654372/

Please note that there is still data associated with the title that is still pending review, for an idea of when all the data will be processed, you can track the status of our current data processing times on the following page: https://contribute.imdb.com/times?ref_=helpms_ch_ci_processing
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7167 Posts
  • 9287 Reply Likes
Is the production status correct?
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Yeah, it is.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Thanks for letting me know.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7167 Posts
  • 9287 Reply Likes
But shouldn't it be "completed" instead of "released"? I'm confused.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Yeah, I didn't think it that way. Several updates are under process. It too might appear later on.
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Hey, certain things have been straightaway declined! Credits haven't been approved and that's a huge error!
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
Prashast,

Capitalizing on the previous message exchanges, what reasons were given to reject them?
(Edited)
Photo of Prashast Singh

Prashast Singh

  • 22 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
"ReasonNot enough evidence.
Your contribution has been declined.We have been unable to verify your contribution. Unfortunately we were unable to accept your submission as we were unable to verify the information provided. "