462 Messages
•
7.6K Points
"(archiveFootage)"
A little while ago, I reported that several archive footage credits are being displayed as:
Self (archiveFootage)
(The "archiveFootage" part appears as part of the character name, not in the attribute field)
This was addressed by Michelle, who reported in another thread that she had reached out to the contributor (https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/self-archivefootage/61d42c0059e8f360a0ce459b)
However, the problem is still continuing; over the past few months I've been using Google to periodically check on these, and am managing to keep on top of them, but obviously it's not ideal to have to keep fixing them like this.
Of course, it's possible that another contributor is also doing this, but it seems unlikely because a) it's a very specific error to be making, and b) they follow the contributor's pattern of updating documentaries about (mainly) the British and Russian royal families.
However, after reviewing another thread about a similar topic, I wonder if this is a site issue:
- the attribute "archive footage" is displayed as "archiveFootage" (mixed case and no space between words); this affects Reference View but does not affect pro.imdb.com
So maybe the error is persisting because the data is being submitted by a contributor who is using Reference View (or something else that is causing the same effect) and the data automatically defaults to this error when it is submitted?
Here are the two most recent corrections I have submitted for this, in case it would be useful to analyse the original submissions that caused the errors for these titles:
EDIT: Here are some further examples that I found earlier today:





mbmb
1.7K Messages
•
22.9K Points
4 years ago
No, data will not "automatically defaults to it when it is submitted", submission form will not do such a thing. But yes reference view displays these in that way. So it's probably someone who uses reference view and cause is likely they think that's the correct formatting because of seeing these credits like that and submits them that way. So it's most likely that individual's confusion. I'm sure contribution form will not make such a conversion during submission. There is no different contribution form for reference view users and others after all. It's same for everyone.
0
Michelle
Employee
•
18.3K Messages
•
321.9K Points
4 years ago
Hi tom_wake -
Thanks for reporting this recurrence. I can confirm that this is an issue at the contributor level, I have manually corrected any outstanding attributes listed incorrectly as "archiveFootage" and have reached out the applicable contributors.
Thanks again and let us know if you are still observing newly added credits with the badly formatted attribute after this week.
2
tom_wake
462 Messages
•
7.6K Points
2 years ago
Hi Michelle and Bethany,
In this thread, you asked me to report any further instances of this happening.
I am unable to respond in that thread because it has been closed by a member of staff, but I have come across some further occurrences:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1923842/fullcredits
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1923845/fullcredits
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt13131686/fullcredits
3
0
tom_wake
462 Messages
•
7.6K Points
2 years ago
Hi @Bethanny
I am responding to this thread - https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/archivefootage/65246d6be82d554bfb13c45b
(I cannot reply directly because that thread has been closed)
I have found another page with two examples:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt15079754/fullcredits
Thanks
12