J

18 Messages

 • 

300 Points

Monday, November 20th, 2023 3:37 PM

Solved

Contribution Declined for Not Following Guidelines

I have been making contributions for almost 20 years. Most have been accepted. But some have been declined, reworked, declined, reworked, and declined again with the only direction being to refer to your guidelines, which didn't offer any help. This infuriated me so that I gave up contributing for two years. I was drawn back, but it's happening again with reference to not complying with formatting standards. I have compared mine to mine and others that were accepted and I don't see the problem. We don't get paid for this. I have no personal connection to these two submissions. Most of us do this for love of cinema. The two most recent contributions to be declined for this reason are 2023-11-19 02:26:21 and 2023-11-11-17:54:6. I have seen in other posts you have supplied some specificity. Can you for me?

Champion

 • 

7.3K Messages

 • 

274.2K Points

8 months ago

John and Glen:

Please post your last full data submissions here on this message board. You can copy them out of the receipts you would have received from IMDb by e-mail immediately after sending them in. Some of the regulars on the board may review them and, if they can, they may provide suggestions as to how to improve the submissions to get them included in the database. (Also, please include the submission reference number -- it's an 18-digit number that will look something like 230123-123456-789000.)

(edited)

18 Messages

 • 

300 Points

@gromit82​ Somebody declined two contributions that I took the time to write and refer me to guidelines that provided no real explanation. I asked for some specificity as I have seen other users receive. Instead, you want me to post my contribution in the hope that other users will offer ideas about what they THINK the problem might have been. The two contributions were 231119-022621-696000 and 231117-022621-696000. If you can provide the specificity, fine; if not, we'll just forget it.

Employee

 • 

5K Messages

 • 

53.3K Points

@glenrf​ Hi!

Regarding your submission, as it has been explained to you before, modifying the goof to give an explanation on why it's not a goof it's not eligible.

@johnaquino Hi!

I have checked on your submissions, 231117-022621-696000 does not show on our system, perhaps you clicked save for later but it's not submitted? And 231119-022621-696000 you submitted that trivia item that is an explanation on why it doesn't have good ratings, as per our guidelines we do not take personal opinions on trivia, even if it's not your opinion it is still a personal opinion as it's not factual information that is the reason for the low ratings.

Hope this helps both.

Cheers!

10.6K Messages

 • 

224.8K Points

Wait. Isn't modifying a goof item to include an explanation on why/how the original claim being made isn't accurate allowed when the item is being re-categorized as "incorrectly regarded as goof"?

10.6K Messages

 • 

224.8K Points

Yeah, but in those cases, the explanation would go in the explanation field, a separate form field from that of the goof item message itself.

10.6K Messages

 • 

224.8K Points

When deleting a goof item, there is an explanation field right in the submission form, and filling it out is required, in order to submit.

Employee

 • 

5K Messages

 • 

53.3K Points

@jeorj_euler​ Thanks yes! This applies as per guidelines in cases where 'Things that have been widely misinterpreted as goofs in the past.' like the example mentioned there, which is not always the case. Also they need to be moved to 'Incorrectly regarded as goof' not Miscellaneous.

Cheers!

Employee

 • 

17K Messages

 • 

308.6K Points

Hi @glenrf​ -

For this example, regarding the bank robbery and use of masks, I would categorize this as "Incorrectly regarded as goofs" because while it may seem to be an error that the characters delayed putting on their masks for identification purposes, the characters may not have been concerned about identification as they would be leaving the country shortly after.    

For the "Incorrectly regarded as goofs" selection, it is okay to provide an explanation as to why the scene is not a actually a goof.

I hope this helps!