Game DLC pages deleted from Imdb

To be really frank, this is a very terrible policy from imdb. A simple google search will tell you that "No, typically DLC (Downloadable Content) is designed to be used with the base game. DLCs add content to the existing game and are not standalone experiences. You cannot typically buy or activate DLC if you do not own the base game." So I am not sure what imdb means when they say DLCs or expansion packs are supposed to be standalone titles that work without the base game to be listed as separate imdb entries. I think this policy needs to change and I am willing to write a full post here regarding this. I know this will get me nowhere but still this is a really bad decision. DLCs add on to the actual game and there should be a way for fans or users to be able to rate them, (that is what imdb is for, right?). DLCs, expansion packs and the like are marketed and promoted as major content releases, reviewed separately by critics and gaming publications, discussed and rated by fans as unique experiences within a game’s lifecycle. There are DLCs that have gotten nominated for awards. Please do tell how we are supposed to account for that without separate pages? I do not want pages other contributors added to the site with their own time and effort to get deleted but let me tell you there are many DLC titles available on this site (none of them are titles that work without the base game), with thousands of ratings and reviews. Please consider these factors before making policies that do not help the community but put down their free labor under meaningless and outdated restrictions. Please do not mark this as solved unless you can provide a solution, not just for future additions, but for the existing DLC titles that are already part of the database. I know my frustration may be misdirected, I appreciate the support team's efforts regardless.

@Richmond007- Thank you for the feedback! I have raised this along to our policy team. Though no immediate action may be taken, they will review this report accordingly. Thanks!

I've come across this problem, but from the opposite perspective: too many contributors are ignoring the DLC policy and adding expansion content as separate games when they shouldn't be. I get that there are a number of bad listings for DLC that can be found throughout the IMDb, but that is due submissions being made that violate policy, and employees not realizing that contributors are doing it. I also get that there are a number of great DLC/Expansions that add much to the original game, and have in-depth stories and content. And, some even win awards. But for every Witcher 3: Blood & Wine there are dozens of new weapons/outfits DLC that add nothing more than new skins and/or stats to the game. Thus, DLC is treated sort of like a Special Edition/Director's Cut movie release. Adding a new scene to "Star Wars" of a dewback on Tatooine doesn't warrant a new film entry, but if that scene is released separately as a stand-alone video it than can be a separate video entry. Likewise, if and when a DLC later becomes stand-alone games (GTA: Online, Tiny Tina's Wonderland Adventure, etc.) it too can be listed.

That is a very important point you brought up. I would want to clarify regarding what should be regarded under this policy. I totally agree with you on the point that when we mention DLC, it can include a lot of different additions to a game which may be insignificant in terms of adding playtime to the actual game. The solution is very simple in my view. We should only add expansion packs as new titles. Expansion packs that introduce new storylines, areas, characters, or gameplay mechanics that build upon the existing game and therefore add a significant amount of playtime to the game. DLCs which do not fall under the expansion pack category should be considered only if they add a significant amount of playtime, otherwise they should be excluded and not allowed to be added. But in my experience, only expansion packs allow for added playtimes and not DLCs which include mostly cosmetic and visual additions. So to reiterate: Expansion packs that introduce new storylines, locations, characters, or major gameplay features — and significantly extend the playtime or narrative of the base game — should be eligible for their own IMDb entries. Minor DLCs — such as new skins, weapons, cosmetic packs, or small add-ons — should not qualify as separate titles, as they don't meaningfully change or expand the core experience. Adding this clause in the policy will significantly reduce the amount of work needed to make the database clean and concise as DLC pages which are simply cosmetic additions are few and far between and we can either manually request deletions or simply list out the pages and ask imdb staff to check. Do let me know your thoughts.