Today (Dec 6) we are announcing an update to the List pages on the IMDb desktop experience. This update is part of the broader site changes announced recently (https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/topics/upcoming-changes-to-several-imdb-features-du6man1opd5q0). After in-depth discussion and examination, we have decided to simplify the features and functionality for lists. We have merged “compact view” and list editing into a single Edit experience. In that one view, you can now modify your text and add, copy, delete and move items. We have also pulled List actions (edit, export, settings) together into a 1-click menu (the 3 vertical dots on the top right of the page). You will now also find two new options in the Refine menu: ‘In Theaters’ and ‘Keywords.’ Tech constraints on the new system prohibit us from continuing to support drag-and-drop from the Edit view; we appreciate your understanding. For more information about Lists, see the IMDb Help Center.
Karen, Employee
Posted 2 years ago
This is horrendous.
The drag and drop function was incredibly important to how I use the lists because I actually like to be able to reorder them. Even if the numbers function worked properly (which in my experience, it never does - it only seems to register that you've typed a number in maybe 1/10 of the time), you'd still have to keep track of how many items you'd placed higher up or moved lower down and add/subtract accordingly in your head when moving more than one item at once.
Oh, and as well as the numbers never registering for me, the entire system seems bugged for me now because I'm unable to add new items to lists. I can type words into the search bar and it opens a search box with no results.
The drag and drop function was incredibly important to how I use the lists because I actually like to be able to reorder them. Even if the numbers function worked properly (which in my experience, it never does - it only seems to register that you've typed a number in maybe 1/10 of the time), you'd still have to keep track of how many items you'd placed higher up or moved lower down and add/subtract accordingly in your head when moving more than one item at once.
Oh, and as well as the numbers never registering for me, the entire system seems bugged for me now because I'm unable to add new items to lists. I can type words into the search bar and it opens a search box with no results.
Col Needham, Official Rep
Oh, and as well as the numbers never registering for me, the entire system seems bugged for me now because I'm unable to add new items to lists. I can type words into the search bar and it opens a search box with no results.This sounds like there might be a browser plug-in interfering with the page display (for example, a rogue ad blocker). Please can you try the steps on https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/general-information/why-is-imdb-displaying-differently-on-my-brow... and let us know.
Hi, I've realised that the problem is that I was searching for an episode of a TV show rather than a movie or TV series. It now appears to be impossible to add individual episodes of a show to a list because they don't seem to appear in searches. Is this correct or is it just a problem at my end?
bderoes, Champion
You can still add them. For now, you have to look them up first in a standard search, and paste the title id (ex: tt0019726, visible in url of a title page) in the Add Title search box. You might have to hit enter to get it search for the title.
Hopefully they'll fix the Add Title to find TV episodes and Short films.
Hopefully they'll fix the Add Title to find TV episodes and Short films.
Dan Dassow, Champion
Hi Chris Dynamo,
FYI: Col is not short for Colonel, but for Colin. I made the same mistake a few years ago when IMDb was founded.
bderoes
FYI: Col is not short for Colonel, but for Colin. I made the same mistake a few years ago when IMDb was founded.
bderoes
Hopefully they'll fix the Add Title to find TV episodes and Short films.I fully agree.
Dan Dassow, Champion
My humor detection algorithm appears to be malfunctioning. ;-)
I was in the middle of creating a long list when this change happened overnight. Adding some titles is easier but with others is much harder. If you go to add a film and start typing it gives you several choices, but unlike the previous search method it shows you a limited number, and I can't find a way of making the choice wider. This particularly hinders when adding films with short titles. First problem was with the film Z (1969), which didn't come up in the options offered. Also Daniel (1983) didn't appear. The 1938 version of Holiday didn't show up, but did when I typed in the alternate title of Unconventional Linda (though it showed as Holiday!)
I'm pretty good with alternate titles but the way this works has stumped me on a few.
Also you don't see the films being added unless you go back into the list again. So if you've picked the wrong film and got another with the same title it is much more laborious than before in removing and replacing it.
For foreign films you need to guess the title that will come up, e.g. French or an English translation. I typed in Gueule d'Amour and despite being a unique title it didn't come up.
Luckily you've not changed the version on my iPhone (yet, and please don't!) where the search feature is much better.
Frankly not the sort of "improvement" I'd like to see IMDb doing.
I'm pretty good with alternate titles but the way this works has stumped me on a few.
Also you don't see the films being added unless you go back into the list again. So if you've picked the wrong film and got another with the same title it is much more laborious than before in removing and replacing it.
For foreign films you need to guess the title that will come up, e.g. French or an English translation. I typed in Gueule d'Amour and despite being a unique title it didn't come up.
Luckily you've not changed the version on my iPhone (yet, and please don't!) where the search feature is much better.
Frankly not the sort of "improvement" I'd like to see IMDb doing.
If you can't find the film you want, add the film to your watchlist and then you use the move to option to move it to the list you want it in. To see the films added in you have to go right to the end of the list to see it added in.
(Edited)
bderoes, Champion
If you're on the title page, instead of adding to Watchlist, just hold over that button until your lists show, and add it directly to your List.
Another way to see it is added to your list is to Sort your list in Reverse list order, whether you're in Edit mode or regular view mode.
Another way to see it is added to your list is to Sort your list in Reverse list order, whether you're in Edit mode or regular view mode.
Further to my comments above I've just found that short films don't seem to appear when you look to add them now!
bderoes, Champion
Only tried one Short so far. Typing
Have You Got Any Castles?
doesn't show that title, but
tt0030215
did find the correct title.
Have You Got Any Castles?
doesn't show that title, but
tt0030215
did find the correct title.
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled The Rise and Fall of the User-List.
As an avid list-creator, of seven years of intensive work, with the sole purpose of trying to create relevant lists that not only promote the films themselves but also the IMDb experience, the latest list of ongoing changes to user-lists is a real kick in the teeth. However, on a more positive note; time that would have normally been spent on IMDb can now be used for more practical purposes.
Thanks for that.
Yours sincerely
Dr-Faustus
As an avid list-creator, of seven years of intensive work, with the sole purpose of trying to create relevant lists that not only promote the films themselves but also the IMDb experience, the latest list of ongoing changes to user-lists is a real kick in the teeth. However, on a more positive note; time that would have normally been spent on IMDb can now be used for more practical purposes.
Thanks for that.
Yours sincerely
Dr-Faustus
Dr-Faustus, that's kind of how I responded to the closure of the IMDb message boards, in that I started focusing more on contributing, but sadly a lot of those contributions were to the swiki sections of the site, so I partially wasted my time. The worst thing about the IMDb staff is their reluctance to provide forewarning. One minute, the CEO will claim, "O, that aspect of the site will not be affected", and then months later, "We are proud to announce that we have made this simpler." And if you try to inquire ahead of their plans (as I've done for a few of the recent changes [title FAQ pages and ratings pages]), they act like they do not know unless they are ready to come clean.
I can't believe that there is no single way to see my lists in a correct IMDb rating order anymore. This site is always changing for worse.
Dan Dassow, Champion
Hi Angelo,
Although this is significantly less convenient, you can use an Advanced Title Search to sort any title list in rating order. If you are logged in, you will see under Lists Include: a list of your title lists.
1. Select one of your lists under Lists Include.
2. Select User Rating Descending under Display Options.
3. Click the yellow Search button.
For example, this is one of my lists sorting in descending order of user ratings:
Highest Rated Titles In Your "All 151 Oscar-Qualifying Documentaries for 2013" List
http://www.imdb.com/search/title?lists=ls052183003&sort=user_rating,desc
... and, yes, this is much less convenient than being able to do this on the page of the list.
Although this is significantly less convenient, you can use an Advanced Title Search to sort any title list in rating order. If you are logged in, you will see under Lists Include: a list of your title lists.
1. Select one of your lists under Lists Include.
2. Select User Rating Descending under Display Options.
3. Click the yellow Search button.
For example, this is one of my lists sorting in descending order of user ratings:
Highest Rated Titles In Your "All 151 Oscar-Qualifying Documentaries for 2013" List
http://www.imdb.com/search/title?lists=ls052183003&sort=user_rating,desc
... and, yes, this is much less convenient than being able to do this on the page of the list.
You didn't understand. The movies with the same rating number are appearing in popularity order in the lists AND in the advanced title search. There are no way to see an accurate IMDb rating order anymore. Pick the list you used as an example and see it: the movies with the same rating number are appearing in popularity order and not in an accurate user rating order. Ex: all the movies with 7.6 are appearing in popularity order. Sort these 7.6 titles in popularity order and you will see that the result will be the same. Thanks, anyway.
Jen, Champion
Will text formatting within lists be restored?
Dan Dassow, Champion
Jen,
I certainly hope so.
For instance, the formatting tag for a user name no longer works.
[link=ur0127678] should produce:
dan_dassow
Instead this results:
ur0127678
The link is also incorrect:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls062992205/ur0127678
It should be
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur0127678/
I certainly hope so.
For instance, the formatting tag for a user name no longer works.
[link=ur0127678] should produce:
dan_dassow
Instead this results:
ur0127678
The link is also incorrect:
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls062992205/ur0127678
It should be
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur0127678/
Peter, Champion
Jen, could you specify what doesn't work?
All of the tags listed here seem to work:
https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/tr...
Edit: Possibly the first link type [link]address[/link] does not work in image descriptions in image lists, and single line spaces are still not kept in the new slideshow-style image view.
All of the tags listed here seem to work:
https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/tr...
Edit: Possibly the first link type [link]address[/link] does not work in image descriptions in image lists, and single line spaces are still not kept in the new slideshow-style image view.
(Edited)
bderoes, Champion
I have another bug to report:
the description markup [red]...[/red] no longer works, although green does.
I haven't tried all the colors today:
https://www.imdb.com/activity/help/descriptionmarkup
the description markup [red]...[/red] no longer works, although green does.
I haven't tried all the colors today:
https://www.imdb.com/activity/help/descriptionmarkup
Yes, it's a pity. I hope they're working on it because the only one that works for me is purple, not green.
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled IMDb lists.
Wow does this suck? It's so complicated now. Instead of just hitting one button to delete a listing I have to check the title then scroll all the way up and then it reloads the page..........
Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: What about TV episodes lists!?.
Wow does this suck? It's so complicated now. Instead of just hitting one button to delete a listing I have to check the title then scroll all the way up and then it reloads the page..........
Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: What about TV episodes lists!?.
Yes, this sucks.
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Why the list view is canceled from "Your Lists"?.
Why the list view is canceled from "Your Lists"? It was the easiest way to move items from one list to another. How can I do this operation now?
Why the list view is canceled from "Your Lists"? It was the easiest way to move items from one list to another. How can I do this operation now?
bderoes, Champion
The 3-vertical-dot menu button to the right of the list title gives an Edit option. You can select and copy from there.
I just started a new question strand, but it seems it may be relevant to this discussion so I'm repeating it here:
In the last few days (the recent update?) I've noticed that when I search for a title, either in the main search or when I'm trying to add a title to a list, if I type the British title the drop-down suggestion box shows only the American title. When I click on that it takes me to the right film with the (original) British title intact. I'm sure it didn't do this before. My point is that I will not always know that "The Smallest Show On Earth" is known in America as "Big Time Operators", or that "The Boat That Rocked" is known as "Pirate Radio". And if I don't know the alternate title I don't know to select that item from the suggestion list. Can anyone at IMDB help please?
In the last few days (the recent update?) I've noticed that when I search for a title, either in the main search or when I'm trying to add a title to a list, if I type the British title the drop-down suggestion box shows only the American title. When I click on that it takes me to the right film with the (original) British title intact. I'm sure it didn't do this before. My point is that I will not always know that "The Smallest Show On Earth" is known in America as "Big Time Operators", or that "The Boat That Rocked" is known as "Pirate Radio". And if I don't know the alternate title I don't know to select that item from the suggestion list. Can anyone at IMDB help please?
Couldn't agree more. I may know alternate titles if I've seen the film or look in the index at the back of a reference book. But some of those used now are really obscure, looks to me like they've defaulted to US titles for everything.
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled IMDB Watchlist RSS feed contains HTML.
The RSS watchlist subdomain (http://rss.imdb.com[...]) has recently began serving HTML instead of XML for the feed's content. Looking at the page source it does have the XML header appending to the top of the page but the actual content is HTML. This obviously breaks things. Please fix thanks.
The RSS watchlist subdomain (http://rss.imdb.com[...]) has recently began serving HTML instead of XML for the feed's content. Looking at the page source it does have the XML header appending to the top of the page but the actual content is HTML. This obviously breaks things. Please fix thanks.
And it is annoying as hell.
bderoes, Champion
Reordering a List.
I have a list of 91 titles that I want clustered by vague concepts that I don't want to try to name.
So I exported the list to a spreadsheet, cut/paste into the clusters, assigned new position numbers, and tried to move them.
I started with the cluster that was supposed to end the list. Here was the intended mapping:
1 >> 79
3 >> 80
5 >> 81
17 >> 82
23 >> 83
28 >> 84
33 >> 85
34 >> 86
52 >> 87
53 >> 88
72 >> 89
78 >> 90
89 >> 91
I entered these all at once, and double checked my entries before hitting Save Ordered List.
Here was the result (I left in the intended numbers for comparison):
1 >> 79 >>> 68
3 >> 80 >>> 70
5 >> 81 >>> 72
17 >> 82 >>> 74
23 >> 83 >>> 76
28 >> 84 >>> 78
33 >> 85 >>> 80
34 >> 86 >>> 82
52 >> 87 >>> 84
53 >> 88 >>> 86
72 >> 89 >>> 61
78 >> 90 >>> 66
89 >> 91 >>> 85
I was moving 11 items; the first title is off by 11, the second by 10, the third by 9, etc. until title 72. I can sort of imagine what happened to the first 8 (they each lost a slot by their own movement.). But the last 3? No clue. And I have a degree in Computer Science from long ago.
I'm sure that if I had assigned these 11 positions 92-103 they would have landed fine. But that wouldn't help me with the next cluster up.
I'm going to export the list, match the new positions to my titles, and try to move a cluster to the top of the list instead. I'll report back with the results. HOPEFULLY, because the new position is supposed to "insert before the current holder of this position", moving up will work better than moving down.
I have a list of 91 titles that I want clustered by vague concepts that I don't want to try to name.
So I exported the list to a spreadsheet, cut/paste into the clusters, assigned new position numbers, and tried to move them.
I started with the cluster that was supposed to end the list. Here was the intended mapping:
1 >> 79
3 >> 80
5 >> 81
17 >> 82
23 >> 83
28 >> 84
33 >> 85
34 >> 86
52 >> 87
53 >> 88
72 >> 89
78 >> 90
89 >> 91
I entered these all at once, and double checked my entries before hitting Save Ordered List.
Here was the result (I left in the intended numbers for comparison):
1 >> 79 >>> 68
3 >> 80 >>> 70
5 >> 81 >>> 72
17 >> 82 >>> 74
23 >> 83 >>> 76
28 >> 84 >>> 78
33 >> 85 >>> 80
34 >> 86 >>> 82
52 >> 87 >>> 84
53 >> 88 >>> 86
72 >> 89 >>> 61
78 >> 90 >>> 66
89 >> 91 >>> 85
I was moving 11 items; the first title is off by 11, the second by 10, the third by 9, etc. until title 72. I can sort of imagine what happened to the first 8 (they each lost a slot by their own movement.). But the last 3? No clue. And I have a degree in Computer Science from long ago.
I'm sure that if I had assigned these 11 positions 92-103 they would have landed fine. But that wouldn't help me with the next cluster up.
I'm going to export the list, match the new positions to my titles, and try to move a cluster to the top of the list instead. I'll report back with the results. HOPEFULLY, because the new position is supposed to "insert before the current holder of this position", moving up will work better than moving down.
bderoes, Champion
OK, moving the first cluster (7 titles) to the top of the list worked great.
EXCEPT those moves change most of the position numbers after the first 7, and it doesn't change them all by 7, only those originally in the first 7 slots; others move according to how many titles jumped ahead of them.
So, IMDb execs, do you start to understand why people are pleading for drag/drop? It's nearly impossible to "see" what the algorithm is going to do when you move more than one title at a time. Frankly, even when you move 1 title, all the titles between the original position and the new position change their position numbers too.
Since I'm reordering my entire list, I have lots of options. But when merging new titles into an already sorted list, you have fewer options. Probably only to move 1 at a time. And on a list with multiple hundred titles, to move and verify each reorder is incredibly laborious. Then you need to refresh the origin and destination positions for the next move.
That's why we need a system that allows us to open a position in the list and specify "bring this title here." That's what drag/drop does without numbers.
I'm going to continue playing around with my list. I'll post any further findings here.
EXCEPT those moves change most of the position numbers after the first 7, and it doesn't change them all by 7, only those originally in the first 7 slots; others move according to how many titles jumped ahead of them.
So, IMDb execs, do you start to understand why people are pleading for drag/drop? It's nearly impossible to "see" what the algorithm is going to do when you move more than one title at a time. Frankly, even when you move 1 title, all the titles between the original position and the new position change their position numbers too.
Since I'm reordering my entire list, I have lots of options. But when merging new titles into an already sorted list, you have fewer options. Probably only to move 1 at a time. And on a list with multiple hundred titles, to move and verify each reorder is incredibly laborious. Then you need to refresh the origin and destination positions for the next move.
That's why we need a system that allows us to open a position in the list and specify "bring this title here." That's what drag/drop does without numbers.
I'm going to continue playing around with my list. I'll post any further findings here.
bderoes, Champion
I finished sorting my list by just powering through the entry of all new positions. It put ONE title in the wrong place: the one title that should have stayed where it was. I wonder if I had entered the position again if it would have stayed put.
I'll tell you this: if we had an option to sort by the description we enter, and then freeze the positions there I needn't have calculated the exact location of each title. That's true for some of my people lists as well.
I'll tell you this: if we had an option to sort by the description we enter, and then freeze the positions there I needn't have calculated the exact location of each title. That's true for some of my people lists as well.
Thanks for thoroughly evaluating this stuff, bderoes.
Nothing says "user friendly" like swapping out drag and drop for the ease of math and crossing your fingers. The people who made this change have to know how ridiculous it is. Hopefully they're given a chance to fix this mess. It really shouldn't be this difficult.
Great job, seriously. And the problem is only magnified as a list gets bigger. Refreshing the page after every single position change to see what "undefined behaviour" has occurred? Pretty bad but not catastrophic. Moving several pages over after every single position change? That's your entire weekend gone on reordering one list.
All I want is predictable, well-defined reordering behaviour without major bugs. The solution doesn't have to be drag and drop but drag and drop is the epitome of predictable and well-defined.
All I want is predictable, well-defined reordering behaviour without major bugs. The solution doesn't have to be drag and drop but drag and drop is the epitome of predictable and well-defined.
(Edited)
Your "merge of compact view and list editing into a single Edit experience" is a TOTAL SLOW FEST. To add few items to a 218 titles list and to place them properly takes a ten times (if not twenty or even thirty) more time and efforts. The IMDb web developers are absolute UNPROFESSIONAL in holding the usability on at least the same level. The opening my list in an edit mode now means the loading of hundred full sized posters and it's SLOW. I cannot add title to first page of my list without opening the last page and it's SLOW.
I cannot add a comment to a second last added title without refreshing the page
and it's SLOW.
I cannot remove title without refreshing the page
and it's SLOW.
I cannot add a title of short film without additional search of title ID
and it's SLOW.
I cannot add a foreign title for sure without additional search of title ID
and it's SLOW. The button SAVE LIST ORDER gone from the bottom of edit page and its SLOWING my work. Etc. etc.etc.
It's very unprofessional to do something without a proper testing. [angry]
It's very unprofessional to do something without a proper testing. [angry]
(Edited)
bderoes, Champion
I totally support what you're saying.
But here are some suggestions:
But here are some suggestions:
- You can get to the end of a long list quickly by editing the URL to "page=n" where n is the last page number of your list, and the URL looks like this: http://www.imdb.com/list/ls00000/edit?sort=list_order,asc&page=2
- If you're going to a title page to get the title id to add in Edit mode, you might as well just add the title to the list via the mouseover-Watchlist button on the title page. Then you can refresh the Edit mode page and the title will be at the end of the list.
- If you add a title from its title page and need to add comments, you can get to the last items in the list by using the reverse button next to List Order. (This is one of the actual improvements to list editing.)
- But if, while in Reverse List Order, you want to add a title to the list in Edit mode and then add comments, it takes a refresh in between to get the new title to show at the end (displayed top) of the list.
Won't this "just add the title to the list via the mouseover-Watchlist button on the title page" add it to your Watchlist?
bderoes, Champion
@Patrick Gordon-Brown
Mouseover, meaning Hover until the full list of Lists drops down. Then select the destination list.
Mouseover, meaning Hover until the full list of Lists drops down. Then select the destination list.
(Edited)
bderoes, mouseover-Watchlist button on the title page only adds titles to my watchlist or opens my lists without adding a title to them. This function goes for few years (for me).
bderoes, Champion
So you see something like this, and click on the + to the left of the list name, and it opens the list? (Opening the list happens when I click on the double right carat to the right of the list name). If so, do you have some extra script running on title pages?
![]()
I don't get a page that looks like that, like nonduc nonduc I only get the option to Add to Watchlist. What browser are you using to get that view?
bderoes, Champion
Chrome, Edge and Firefox give the add-to-lists drop-down on Title pages.
You have to be signed in to get that, otherwise you get only a white box with "Click to add to watchlist". I didn't click to see what happened.
You have to be signed in to get that, otherwise you get only a white box with "Click to add to watchlist". I didn't click to see what happened.
I still only get the Add to Watchlist option when I hover over the box. I'm signed in to my member account. In Chrome or Edge it doesn't look like your screen either
bderoes, Champion
Forgive the question, but: You have created your own lists, right? And you're logged into the account where the lists were created?
Since you have Edge, that means you're on Windows 10?
Even when I log in to an account where I've made no lists, the mouseover still gives me 2 options:
View Watchlist
New List
Do you have any scripts or ad blockers running?
Anything interesting about your mouse and/or how it's configured?
Does mouseover trigger (without clicking) the dropdowns for the 4 choices on the row with the IMDb logo, namely Movies, TV and Showtimes, and 3 others.
Since you have Edge, that means you're on Windows 10?
Even when I log in to an account where I've made no lists, the mouseover still gives me 2 options:
View Watchlist
New List
Do you have any scripts or ad blockers running?
Anything interesting about your mouse and/or how it's configured?
Does mouseover trigger (without clicking) the dropdowns for the 4 choices on the row with the IMDb logo, namely Movies, TV and Showtimes, and 3 others.
It is to do with site settings! I've always set it so I see Full Cast & Crew. if I untick that box I get a large + sign next to the title that wasn't there before. This then gives me the view you have. thanks for your help.
bderoes, Champion
@Patrick Gordon-Brown
Great job figuring that out! & Thanks for reporting back.
I just tried that view, and had trouble even finding the Add to Watchlist link, buried among other links in the left column, and no provision for adding to other lists.
Great job figuring that out! & Thanks for reporting back.
I just tried that view, and had trouble even finding the Add to Watchlist link, buried among other links in the left column, and no provision for adding to other lists.
Councillor3004
bderoes, Champion
Col Needham, Official Rep
Col Needham, Official Rep
ATS results can also be bookmarked. For example, here's a public list of mine, sorted by the number of user votes -> http://www.imdb.com/search/title?count=250&lists=ls066993558&sort=num_votes,desc&view=si...
Heber Blain Gonçalves
bderoes, Champion
Thanks for pointing out the Refine option, that'll do the trick.
As for the Advanced Search: I use it a lot, but it is cumbersome:
- too much to scroll past
- wish you'd use drop-down lists for those boxes of options and checkboxed options, and
- maybe use 2 columns to list the various possible criteria.
The Compact output from ATS would be better if single-spaced. BTW, the link to add to Watchlist is excellent.Will we ever get some options to control And vs Or? For instance, I could easily check 3 of my lists for missing ratings if I had an Or option when selecting my Include lists. (I know, this would just lead to more requests for such things.) Even if we had to alter the search URL by hand to insert the Or symbol (or a Not symbol), that would be superb.
bderoes, Champion
Dan Dassow, Champion
I also miss the compact view available on the list page.
If you know the list ID for a title list, replace the list ID in this search to see this title list in the compact view:
Highest Rated Titles In Your "All 151 Oscar-Qualifying Documentaries for 2013" List
http://www.imdb.com/search/title?lists=ls052183003&sort=user_rating,desc&view=simple
If you know the list ID for a people list, replace the list ID in this search to see this people list in the compact view:
Most Popular People In List "ls053280505"
http://www.imdb.com/search/name?lists=ls053280505&view=simple
I fully agree this is less convenient than having the compact view available on the list page.
bderoes, Champion
Your suggestion is superb!
I find that it also works to have the list= last, as in
http://www.imdb.com/search/title?count=250&view=simple&lists=ls052183003
Now if someone knew enough javascript to take this
http://www.imdb.com/search/title?count=250&view=simple&lists=
and tack on the list id when we're sitting at
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls052183003/
to create the 1st url, THEN we'd have something worth bookmarking.
I'm inspired by the one-liner
javascript:location.href='http://web.archive.org/save/'+location.href
which is a 1-line script you can bookmark to submit a page you're on to the Wayback Machine for archiving.
Dan Dassow, Champion
Jeorj Euler
bderoes, Champion
Dan Dassow,
Just to be clear, I found that javascript at the Wayback site (actually, they referred us to another site which had that cataloged.)
Maybe someone who follows this discussion will know how to use javascript to extract the list id from http://www.imdb.com/list/ls052183003/so the new script would look something like
javascript:location.href='http://www.imdb.com/search/title?count=250&view=simple&lists='+listIDextraction
Christopher Shobris