Contribution Declined

@dab07041929​ Accepting or not an item can depend on many factors, the easiest way to have no problems with  your submissions is providing anything that can help editors verify things. It may also be a processing error as there are humans behind the processing of the data. For an item to be looked into specifically we will need the 18-digit submission reference.

Cheers!

I could try to clarify, but I'm a confused about why what I expressed is somehow incomprehensible. What do anxious contributors expect the data editors to do? Are the data editor expected to go looking for the Blu-ray/DVD, buy it and watch it, for the purposes of verification, all within seven days? And then, if time runs out, are they simply expected to approve for publication the information that could possibly be erroneous? Are these hard questions to answer? Possibly, but certainly everybody reading the questions understands the meaning of them, right? What gives?

I was assuming good faith toward the inqury, but now, given the continued lack of cooperation, I'm starting to suspect gaslighting.

@jeorj_euler​ What do you mean by lack of cooperation?  I replied above that I will try to include a time stamp in the future to improve my submissions (which in fact I did in my last two which were summarily declined).  And in my original post I mentioned that I was not so invested in the submissions that were declined that it was worth anybody's effort to review them.

And as for not understanding your first reply, I had no idea that there was some kind of time limit on how long submissions could be pending.  Why did that prompt a second sarcastic insulting reply?  

Do me a favor - if you're not going to be constructive in your replies, don't bother.

Well, there has been no sarcasm on my part. I do apologize, however, for my hurt-causing accusations, though. I'm not deliberately trying to irritate anybody, but I do generally become irritated whenever anybody claims to not understand what I'm telling him/her, despite me being extremely clear in the first place. I literally cannot help but wonder how I'm not understood, that I must've left out some crucial information.

In the context of movies and shows that are available on Amazon's streaming service, the approach of merely providing a timestamp may possibly be viable, and this could somewhat extend to other streaming services. Otherwise, unless the  the IMDb data editors are somehow very confident in a particular contributor, they expect for hyperlinks, to screenshots of the actual content of the movie, to be provided in the explanation field of the submission form. This is the way things are. Okay? Now, if all those procedures are followed but yet the accurate (and allowed) items in the submission still wind up being declined regardless, then by all means, come back to this forum and inquire about it, even complain.

Hi @dab07041929​ -

My apologies for the delayed staff response here.  I appreciate your feedback and understand the frustration, especially after making efforts to include evidence/explanations.

If you are still experiencing instances where your submissions are being declined despite valid evidence being provided, can you post some recent examples here of the 18-digit submission reference numbers for our staff to investigate?

Thank you for responding.  The most recent example is #230819-005157-966000 on August 18 2023.  I explained why it was a goof and provided a time stamp.  It was declined due to "Does not meet contribution guidelines", whatever that means.  It may well not meet the guidelines, but who knows why.  A further explanation of the reasons for a contribution being declined may take more time on IMDB's part, but it would also be more efficient in helping contributors to identify and frame items such as goofs so more time isn't wasted declining contributions that aren't valid.  As I have noted in earlier comments, it frankly seems to be a random process as to why some are accepted and some are declined since I identify no difference in the validity and quality of the contributions.  Don't know whether these are reviewed by automated process or an actual human, but I don't want to waste my time, or IMDB's, submitting contributions which don't pass muster.

@Michelle​ And we have yet another contributions declined - #230829-200245-692000 because it "Does not meet contribution guidelines".  Again, even though I describe the goof in detail and provide a time stamp, for which I was chided earlier for not including in my submissions.  Again, it would be helpful to understand why it did not meet the guidelines. again, just seems like a random process as to whether my submissions get accepted or rejected.

Hi @dab07041929​ -

Upon reviewing these submissions  I can see that they were likely declined because they included a potential Spoiler but they weren't submitted with a spoiler tag.  These goofs have now been approved with the spoiler tag.