Skip to main content

4 Messages

 • 

186 Points

Tue, Jun 2, 2020 6:07 PM

0

A few more words on rejections would be nice

I've been making numerous minor corrections - copy editing, typos, links, duplicates - and every once in a while something gets rejected.  This happens most often on duplicate deletion, with "not verified", even when I supply a link to the item that duplicates the one I'm deleting.

My only option (other than just dropping it) seems to be to try to guess what the reviewer is looking for, and try again.  Maybe they thought I should merge in some material from the duplicate?  Maybe they thought I should delete the other one?  Maybe they thought I shouldn't have merged in material?

If I'm deleting a goof, did they think I should move it to "incorrectly regarded as goofs"?  If I moved it to IRAG, did they think I should have deleted it? If I moved it to IRAG, did they think it was a legitimate goof, or did they just not like my wording as I recast it to being an IRAG?

Adding just a few words would really help to understand what the reviewer is thinking.  I understand that you need to get through the backlog as quickly as possible, but especially when you basically agree with the change it would be really helpful to get a hint which way to go next.

Examples:

https://contribute.imdb.com/contribution/200531-055102-196000/
The existence of Galactic North and South is unquestionable.  The original item was just wrong.  But did the reviewer want me to delete it, or (somehow) rephrase it?  (Or just not believe me, despite the reference I included?)  I've tried just deleting it... we'll see what happens.

https://contribute.imdb.com/contribution/200531-045629-901000/
The two entries (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708489/goofs?item=gf5006890 and https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708489/goofs?item=gf5097010) are clearly duplicates.  Neither has any votes.  The one I retained is categorized better and has the actor's name linked.  I included a link to the entry I was retaining.  Rejected as "unable to verify".  What could I have done differently?  What was the reviewer looking for?

I'm not asking for a paragraph... often just two or three words would be enough.

Responses

No Responses!