Contribution Interface Updates - New Features Now Live

I am really struggling with adding Role (previously Occupation). The role I want to add is just not there in the provided limited roles, for example "associate cinematographer" in Camera and Electrical Department. before we would just choose other in Role and add occupation from long list, it wasn't perfect but it worked. I am not sure what wrong I'm doing here, I am not seeing more roles than few provided, I tried in many devices and browsers.

@Jayseph: Thanks for the announcement. About the Improved Attribute Selection: -In the description of the attributes some articles are missing. Example: "Voice is heard but face does not appear" instead of the proper "The (or "one's", or "the person's") voice is heard but the (or "his/her/their") face does not appear". Currently, it doesn't look very professional. -About the attribute Rumored: Rumored means no more or less than that you're not fully sure of something. If I'm not sure about something, I simply don't add it to the database (or I ask on this forum) because I don't want to add potentially wrong information. I fail to see why IMDb explicitly invites people to add possible wrong information that at a later moment has to be removed. To me, that seems silly and not very professional. I would understand it if you'd allow this attribute for things that can't be known for sure (for example, information regarding films from the 1910's that are lost), but the description of the attribute ("A top industry trade has reported that the person is closely linked to the title, but this has not been announced officially.") suggest to me that the attribute is used for titles that are still in the making. -Can IMDb look into the formerly existing and later blocked attribute (also archive footage)? (see also https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/when-did-also-archive-footage-get-dropped-as-an-attribute/6446e9cd00bd3f7acdb40ae3 + https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/invalid-attribute-also-archive-footage/629d38d2ae73c605a6842314?commentId=630689ab892fc367e246f212&replyId=6318c3a4570fb7687bb2ee1a0). IMDb is a Database and with the removal of this attribute, there is now less data for the 200+ millions of customers of IMDb. I fail to see why IMDb thinks it was a good decision to remove the attribute (also archive footage). -Regarding the segments attribute: Am I missing something or is it not possible to use this attribute without giving the segment a name/title? Not all segments have names, so it should therefore be possible to add the attribute without giving it a name/title. Splitting Self and Cast is a good move. Among other things, it's now more consistent with how a name page looks.

As New contributor the changes made to simplify contributions finally enticed me to help fill in absent info and correct mistakes after years of muttering in muted breath as I discover info issues. On that note, Thank You! As to those who added & corrected info before me with the old system."Hats off to You". I use IMDb extensively and over the last 12yrs having looked up over 4600 movie type titles, almost 500 mini-series, approaching 5000 series, and about 600 Biographical and Documentary movie and series types. Feeling impart like I owe back to the site I reference so much info from. So now I have a productive outlet for my silent ranting over inaccuracies & incompleteness of info as I have time. I'm Quickly finding out I sometimes just have to make time in the moment upon discovering of minor issues and/or adding snap shot photo stills derived from the shows. I just can't help myself at times. I see a future need for a IMDb anonymous forum for info adding addicts ;) Lastly, Thanks to all whom spend time on this forum providing solutions to problems. P.S. Can someone dial back a little on the latest upgrades made in how often drop down ads appear they even drop down repeatedly as you scroll down in search of info to the level of annoyance. I get it, ads is what keeps the lights on but shorten the leash on those tasked with making it happen. Reminds me of the old days when you naively install free programs bloated with nagware pop-ups...and can't react soon enough to uninstall it no matter how useful the prog was.

Follow up on the new attributes field after having used it a couple of days now. Previously it was easy to review the attributes after having added a dozen or more names to a cast list because either the boxes were empty or not. Now the attribute section on the contribution form always contains blue text on a green background (for credits ready to submit). It is much more difficult to review any/all attributes when at a glance, it all looks the same. Please change things so it's easier to tell when pending submissions have attributes, and when they do not.

I know that you recently separated “actor” from “self”, but before this change, we could specify gender when adding the name, but this has been removed for ‘self’ and remains as before for “actor.” To add it for “Self” names, we have to go back to the person's personal page and add it, but we have to wait until their page is created before we can add their gender. Is this normal? Thank you. Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation Link : https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/i-need-to-know/is-it-normal-that-we-can-no-longer-specify-gender-when-adding-guests-in-the-self-section-not-actor/68e33e448f11a15bc22f0ca1 Title : Is it normal that we can no longer specify gender when adding guests in the “Self” section? (not “actor”)

Attributes have been greatly improved for beginners and those who rarely use them, but the new submission form lacks a direct input field. For example, consider the documentary That's Entertainment! [https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072272]. A hundred from the cast list is "uncredited" or "archive footage" or both. The new submission form forces a contributor to make at least 300-400 clicks to submit all the attributes: one to open the field, one to select "uncredited", one to select "archive footage", one to save the selection. This takes at least 300-400 seconds, and the process is very tedious, it is a milder form of torture. The same process takes a maximum of 86 seconds on the old submission form with direct input field if we simply use Ctrl+V (on a Windows PC) to enter the text "(uncredited) (archive footage)" directly into each field. And a simple javascript or a browser extension will handle the same direct inputs in 1-2 seconds. NOTE: "Uncredited" and "Archive footage" are very important details in the database. Documentaries, Music Videos, and old productions of all types all contain mostly untitled casts. Collections, educational materials, video podcasts about the film industry, documentaries with historical context -- all contain mostly archival footage. By removing the input field from the Attributes, you successfully teach contributors to ignore important details.

The Role dropdown menu steals the Home and End buttons from the input field, which is a bad practice in coding. It is disrespectful to the user. Any user expects a text field to work correctly with traditional hotkeys. Home, End, Shift+Home, Shift+End are very often used when editing text. In the new submission form the Home and End buttons do not function in text field when the menu dropped down. Moreover, the "No suggestions" message results in the same effect!

Enhanced Role Selection taken away in the new submission form. Now in each credit category the Role drop-down menu features a minuscule list which could hardly cover 0.01% of the credits in a single Marvel production. Previously, the Role menu appeared on demand with a click and contained the most comprehensive list of job titles (roles) carefully collected by IMDb contributors from factual data for more than thirty years. It was one of the great distinctive features of IMDb comparing to its competitors. Additionally, as a multilingual contributor I can say that the quality of data from non-English titles submitted by inexperienced contributors will drastically decrease without the comprehensive list of job titles. This is not such a big problem when you are typing into the base what you see on the screen in English; but from other languages you also need to find the correct interpretation of the credit from the language of the screen to English. Online translators are mostly unhelpful. You can find a good vocabulary of special terms from French, Italian, German to English, but with other languages it's a big problem. When I started as a contributor many years ago, the most fruitful way to find the correct term in English from other languages was to interpret it backwards. I used to look up the job titles from the full IMDb list in the same section, then selected the most relevant ones and learned their English explanations from English dictionaries, and finally had the opportunity to match the meaning from the description.

With the split of persons onscreen into SELF page from the previous CAST page, it is noted that cast are still identified as 'actor' or 'actress' denoting male or female, but the new SELF page does not accord those people appearing onscreen, the same courtesy. I get that 'crew' also have no identifier but this is, I assume, because they are not seen, making gender identification problematic. Since very often those appearing in the self category are distinguished people from the scientific, ed‎ucational or other institutions worldwide, I feel they may appreciate even basic recording of their gender. IMDB care to elaborate on why no gender? Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation Link : https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/gender-on-new-self-contribution-page-01oct2025/68e677ee8f11a15bc2452e0f Title : Gender on new SELF contribution page 01OCT2025

You reduced the Cinematographer to 10 again, the 25 was good, 15 would be good too

Question about the rules that were used to move credits from the CAST section to the SELF section. On some TV shows where there is a mix of 'self' and 'cast', the credits are correct after the move, but on others, the 'cast' (those without "Self - " in the character name) were moved to 'self'. Not only is it going to take a significant amount of time to undo the incorrect moves, but seeing this makes me wonder what rules were used to make these moves. IMO it seemed obvious that those without "Self - " in the character name (now role) field would remain in 'cast', but that didn't happen. So what were the rules for the move (so we know where to look for the corrections that need to be made - assuming that the bad moves can't be undone)? Thanks.

MAthePA said above: "If, for example, the "Guitarist" is a role played and "Interviewee" is a self credit of one and the same person, then in the new submission form you have to place "Guitarist" into the [Cast] section and "Interviewee" into the [Self] section, and finally you'll see them as "Guitarist / Self - Interviewee" on the title page." If someone both appears as themselves and as a character in the same title or episode - as in Saturday Night Live or similar - it does make sense to submit them in both the Cast and the Self section, but it would be nice to know from IMDb whether this is the intention. And if so, what to do about cast order if the name is only credited once? There is no clarity in the guidelines.

No staff seems to be replying anymore in the announcement thread for the contribution interface updates in early October. Regarding the "carefully curated options" in the role dropdown menus for crew, it is hard to understand some of the choices: Under Art Department, "property master" and "props" are omitted. Under Art Directors, one of the options is "art director/production designer", which seems to be two roles that should not be combined. Another option is "art department", which probably belongs only under Art Department. Under Camera and Electrical Department, "d.i.t" is missing a period. Under Casting Department, "english version, casting director" is unusually formatted. Under Editorial Department, "colorist" and "color timer" are omitted. Under Music Department the typo "perfomer" is included. Under Producers you could include "commissioning editor" and "series editor", which are defined as producer roles in your guidelines. Under Production Designers there is "assistant production designer", which belongs in Art Department according to the guidelines. "Set designer" appears under both Production Designers and Art Department. Under Production Managers, "head of entertainment group" is unusual. Under Script and Continuity, "script editor" is omitted. "Prosthetics" is included under both Makeup Department and Special Effects. The Art Department guidelines suggest they belong under makeup. Under Additional Crew, "production assistant" is omitted. Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation Link : https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/role-dropdowns/690419f6c73dd05764cd41d3 Title : Role dropdowns

Maybe not the right forum but I have asked a few times in the past, if there is (or could be produced, or is in consideration), ONE comprehensive page where a contributor can type in a job and get the correct department as required by IMDB.. The reason for the question .... again.... is that I have already noted job changes in departments eg 'unit manager' was Production management and 'unit assistant' was in Additional Crew and now both are Location Management, which actually makes more sense. Another point for the question is that all the old drop down menus in alphabetical order, that could be 'searched' seem to no longer exist, which would seem to make it even more imperative to have a comprehensive list of jobs in departments to avoid going back to the past where jobs were placed in a department because that department had the MOST entries of the job, and was therefore assumed to be correct.