Skip to main content
thomas's profile
thomas
4k Badge

181 Messages

 • 

4.8K Points

Wednesday, September 16th, 2015 9:02 AM

Closed

IMDb updated submission interface - official thread for opt-out feedback

UPDATE: The Beta has now moved into the next phase - every contributor will now be directed to https://contribute.imdb.com/ by default. If you are unable to contribute using the updated site, please go to Site Settings and check the box next to 'The updated submission interface is not working for me'. You will then be redirected to the old site. Please note that the opt-out option will only be available for a limited time so it is vital that you tell us why you can not use the new version so we can fix the issues. This is now the official thread to collect opt-out feedback and bug reports. Feature requests have been moved to the ideas section.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi there,

This thread is the official place to leave feedback for the submission interface Beta. If you arrived here via the Beta invite Helpdesk message, please do leave your feedback in the comments below. If you didn't receive the invite but you'd like to join the Beta anyway, please read on...

What is happening?
  • We’re changing some of the technology that powers the IMDb submission interface
What will change?
  • The submission interface URL will change from starting with http://www.imdb.com (or https://addpro.imdb.com) to starting with https://contribute.imdb.com (the site you may have used to track your new title or trivia contributions)
  • This means the pages will include the Contribute site header and footer
  • There will be some cosmetic changes to the controls on the page
  • The destination of links on submission pages (www or pro) will be controlled by a new user selectable preference
What will not change?
  • The general functionality and the data itself - all the data you have contributed will be unaffected, and it can still be submitted in the same way
Why is this happening?
  • The old submission interface is built on old, inflexible technology that makes fixing bugs or creating new contributor features slow and difficult. Moving to the Contribute site is an essential step to being able to roll-out faster and safer iterative bug fixes and changes
  • The data in the submission interface is out of sync with the majority of the data on the website because the old technology still relies on a once-a-day build cycle. Updating the submission interface to use the same data as the website is one of the changes that will be enabled by moving to the Contribute site
  • Moving to 'HTTPS' means data is more secure
When is this happening?
  • We’d like to have our customers benefit from these changes as soon as possible, which is why we need your help with the Beta. The plan is to start testing today for as long as it takes until any blocking bugs or requests from the Beta have been raised, fixed or planned
  • Whether you opt in to the Beta or not, please note that the changes will become permanent after a few weeks. At this time there will not be a way to access the old submission interface at all, so please do use this opportunity to provide feedback
How do I get involved?
  • We've added a new preference page https://contribute.imdb.com/siteprefs - select the check box next to 'I want to use the Beta Contribution Site' and click 'save settings'. You'll then be redirected to a URL starting https://contribute.imdb.com whenever you click 'edit page'/visit the submission interface. During the Beta phase, you'll be able opt out again in the same way (please see the update above - contributors are now opted in to the new version by default).
  • We'll be collecting feedback on this thread, so if you don’t have one already you'll need to create a Get Satisfaction account to participate
We're also particularly keen to hear back from anyone who uses any kind of automated script to add data to IMDb. We'd like to make sure the transition is as smooth as possible so please reply if you have any concerns.

Kind regards,

Thomas Porter
Team Manager - IMDb Database Content

Announcements

 • 

Updated 

8 years ago

164

25

michel_cantigneaux_7379278

2 Messages

 • 

122 Points

9 years ago

Will this Beta interface allow the possibility to create a "Webseries" category?
And so to transpose shows now described as "TV Shows" to "webseries" ?

3

0

thomas

181 Messages

 • 

4.8K Points

Hi Michel, no functionality has changed as a result of this work. It makes it easier for us to make this kind of change in the future, but unfortunately not yet. For now please continue to use the TV Series title type, and add the 'web-series' keyword as an identifier.

Kind regards,
Tom

9 years ago

0

jennie_clarke_7640591

2 Messages

 • 

70 Points

how can I get them please

9 years ago

0

jennie_clarke_7640591

2 Messages

 • 

70 Points

help

9 years ago

0

martin_695862

611 Messages

 • 

13.7K Points

9 years ago

A couple of comments:

1. In Firefox V39 (but not Chrome or Opera), the "Correct all" check box on the Update page for Cast is displayed as "Correctall" with no space:


http://s28.postimg.org/728cjhvtp/firefox.png

http://s17.postimg.org/5eg1k67in/chrome.png

Maybe make the size of that text and "keep unchanged" check box text the same size as that for "provide an explanation to assist in processing this change" text - still smaller than main text for field names and values, but not small enough to be illegible as it is at present!

2. The vertical spacing between rows (eg cast or crew members) on the Update page is larger than it used to be. This means that when editing a long cast list, the page needs to be scrolled more because only a few rows are visible on a screenful at once. Compare the above image with http://s17.postimg.org/uit9sd2tr/firefox_old.png which is the old interface.

I find the larger amount of vertical white space is not as easy to read, though maybe it's unfamiliarity.


Is there a description of what's changed apart from the cosmetic appearance changes and the fact that it's an https:// page and that its URL is contribute.imdb.com? Are there any differences in functionality  or validation rules etc - is there anything we need to be aware of, to check that it hasn't regressed?

5

nobody_7029854

756 Messages

 • 

29.6K Points

Re:
http://s9.postimg.org/o6huh4gkr/firefox.png
http://s9.postimg.org/q9s9osgdn/chrome.png

I'm just wondering:
Why did you post such small thumbnails (just 180 pixels wide)?
At that size, they are actually rather difficult to read.  (-;
Can you post larger versions of those screenshots?

9 years ago

0

thomas

181 Messages

 • 

4.8K Points

Thanks Martin, we'll take a look at the spacing/styling.
Is there a description of what's changed apart from the cosmetic appearance changes and the fact that it's an https:// page and that its URL is contribute.imdb.com? Are there any differences in functionality  or validation rules etc - is there anything we need to be aware of, to check that it hasn't regressed?
Please see the original post - the only expected changes are listed under 'What will change?'. Hopefully any unexpected changes will be exposed during this Beta, but functionality and validation should remain the same.

Tom

9 years ago

0

martin_695862

611 Messages

 • 

13.7K Points

Another formatting thing I've noticed: in Firefox, the size of text in the table produced by "Click here to copy existing credits from the series or other episodes" is verging on being too small. Use the size of text in the current (non-beta) version of the page as a guide for how it should be in the new one.

9 years ago

0

owenrees

442 Messages

 • 

14.5K Points

Thanks for the report - I have added it to the list of things to fix.

9 years ago

0

owenrees

442 Messages

 • 

14.5K Points

The spacing and the size of the "Correct all" have been fixed, The fix for the 'copy existing credits' text size should be deployed soon.

9 years ago

martin_695862

611 Messages

 • 

13.7K Points

9 years ago

I've just spotted "Updating the submission interface to use the same data as the website is one of the changes that will be enabled by moving to the Contribute site".

This sounds an excellent change. Many thanks for that!

I'll have to test it to see how up-to-date the information is: one of the main problems I have with IMDB and the old contribution mechanism is that if your submission contains an error (eg a typo) you have to wait 24 hours to be able to submit a correction to it, even though the original submission may have gone live within a few minutes of submitting it.

The ultimate aim of IMDB should be for [b]everything[/b] to use a common live data set, rather than some things like the reference view of the data and the contribution system using an out-of-date snapshot of the data.

By the way, can I make a plea for the reference view, as a user preference, to continue forever and not be phased out, even if that means that it is subject to the 24-hour daily build. There are some things (eg single list of cast for all episodes) which don't seem to exist on the non-reference view of the data, and non-ref doesn't seem to reliably list cast credits in credit-number order. Just thought I'd mention how useful ref view is!

2

0

thomas

181 Messages

 • 

4.8K Points

Hi Martin, thanks for the feedback.
I've just spotted "Updating the submission interface to use the same data as the website is one of the changes that will be enabled by moving to the Contribute site".

This sounds an excellent change. Many thanks for that!
Sorry if this wasn't made clear - this migration to a new technology platform does not automatically fix this problem. It's a step closer to being able to fix it, and it's next on the list to tackle once the Beta is rolled out permanently.
By the way, can I make a plea for the reference view, as a user preference, to continue forever and not be phased out...
We are aware that some contributors prefer this view. We're looking into ways to replace it with something equally useful.

Thanks again,
Tom

9 years ago

0

martin_695862

611 Messages

 • 

13.7K Points

OK. Looks like I'll have to wait just a little bit longer to see the live "same data as the website" view. No problem. It will be a feature that's worth waiting for: anything which makes sure that all the versions of a page have identical data and that some are not out of date is definitely a Good Thing.

As regards Reference View, can I suggest that you project manage this so as to present us with proposed changes (with a user-selectable option to display them) before anything is cast in stone and while any suggestions that we make make can still be implemented. Thanks.

9 years ago

steve_crook

Champion

 • 

1.3K Messages

 • 

43.8K Points

9 years ago

I enabled the "I want to use the Beta Contribution Site" and hit Edit Page from the www.imdb.com site. I was taken to https://contribute.imdb.com/updates for the page I was asking to edit.

Is that expected?
What about the things that can't be edited from Pro?

Thanks

   Steve

8

0

thomas

181 Messages

 • 

4.8K Points

Hi Steve, that is expected, yes. The list of editable options in the submission interface depends solely on whether you have an IMDbPro account or not. It doesn't matter whether you enter via Pro or www., you'll see all the Pro options if you have Pro, or all the regular options if you do not.

You also probably noticed the other new preference on https://contribute.imdb.com/siteprefs

Contribute page links
When selecting a link, show the page on the: WWW Site or Pro Site

Again, this won't change anything in terms of what you can or can't edit. It does however let you choose which version of the site you go to when you click a link within the Contribute site (previously you could not choose - you would be directed to Pro if you had Pro, directed to www. if you did not).

Hope that makes sense?

Tom

9 years ago

0

steve_crook

Champion

 • 

1.3K Messages

 • 

43.8K Points

Thanks Tom,
I prefer the WWW update pages. I'm just more used to them. I also do some updates from a mobile (not via the app but via the web site) and that doesn't like the Pro pages

I've set:
When selecting a link, show the page on the: WWW Site
so I'll see how it works for my next few updates

    Steve

9 years ago

0

thomas

181 Messages

 • 

4.8K Points

Hi Steve, it looks like you have opted out again - was this intentional? If you don't mind, it's preferable that you stay opted-in to test so any issues are weeded out before the opt-out option is removed.

Thanks,
Tom

9 years ago

0

steve_crook

Champion

 • 

1.3K Messages

 • 

43.8K Points

Yes, it was deliberate. As I said, I do some updates from a mobile (not via the app but via the web site) and that doesn't like the Pro pages

But I'll try opting in again

    Steve

9 years ago

0

steve_crook

Champion

 • 

1.3K Messages

 • 

43.8K Points

I  have selected
When selecting a link, show the page on the: WWW pages
but when I do an update it still takes me to the Pro pages

    Steve

9 years ago

0

Peter_pbn

Champion

 • 

14.4K Messages

 • 

329.9K Points

To opt out you need the 'The updated submission interface is not working for me' box, as the update at the top of this page says.

9 years ago

0

steve_crook

Champion

 • 

1.3K Messages

 • 

43.8K Points

Yes, but I wanted to opt in to the new style submissions, but keeping it on the WWW pages.

Isn't that possible?

    Steve

9 years ago

0

Peter_pbn

Champion

 • 

14.4K Messages

 • 

329.9K Points

No, the other option you mention refers only to links away from the update form.

9 years ago

0

gromit82

Champion

 • 

7.4K Messages

 • 

276.1K Points

9 years ago

I agree with Martin that the vertical spacing between rows on the Update page is larger than necessary.

In addition, most of the text in the summary of a submission is printed in gray type on a gray background. I would recommend having all the text in regular black type for better visibility. (See below.)



 

2

thomas

181 Messages

 • 

4.8K Points

Thanks Gromit, noted.

9 years ago

0

owenrees

442 Messages

 • 

14.5K Points

The fix for this has been deployed - the text in the summary should now be black.

9 years ago

0

gromit82

Champion

 • 

7.4K Messages

 • 

276.1K Points

9 years ago

I found another design problem:



Notice that in the example above, the listicon () does not appear directly to the right of the box to which it pertains ("Publication"), but on the following line instead. The listicon should not be separated from the box to which it pertains.

1

0

thomas

181 Messages

 • 

4.8K Points

Thanks Gromit, also noted.

9 years ago

0

martin_695862

611 Messages

 • 

13.7K Points

9 years ago

There's another bug (or feature!) in the present submission system that maybe ought to be sorted out in the new system. If you add a new cast member and there is only one matching person already in the database, you still get prompted to confirm "You've entered Fred Bloggs - do you mean existing entry Bloggs, Fred" (I'm paraphrasing the message) when you only need this disambiguation question if there are two or more existing entries with this name. Removing it reduces the number of questions you have to answer and boxes you have to tick to get the form accepted.

I've just remembered the other thing that isn't listed in the email confirmation (see my earlier message): if a cast member is a brand new name that doesn't already exist, this fact isn't listed in the email. It used to be several years ago but in one of the earlier changes it disappeared. Flagging new names makes it easy to see which cast entries will take longer to appear because they have to be created.

1

0

owenrees

442 Messages

 • 

14.5K Points

You can avoid the extra trip round the form by entering the name in the 'Last, First' order and exactly matching the way it appears in the update forms. In this case we assume that you know that this is exactly the person you want.

In other cases, you are offered the option of saying that this is a different person as an alternative to selecting the one person who matches. Without this extra cycle you do not get the sample credit for the name so it is harder to tell if it is the person you want and there is no obvious way to add a new person with that name. Credits being added to the one name we already have where they should create a new name is one of the more common issues that need to be fixed and this is a small step to try to reduce the chance of that happening.

9 years ago

0

cameron_7461356

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

9 years ago

will this make it easier to add events and awards? The current process is still a bit clunky having to sumbit to help desk. Lot of things missing.

1

0

thomas

181 Messages

 • 

4.8K Points

Hi there, unfortunately not yet, but it does enable us to streamline the submission process at some point down the line.

Tom

9 years ago

0

martin_695862

611 Messages

 • 

13.7K Points

9 years ago

Something else that needs fixing, though it may just be an initial teething problem: the new interface seems to be a lot slower to respond that the old one was: you press the initial Update button or (having filled in some fields) the Re-Check button and there is a delay of up to 10 seconds before the new page appears, which is painfully slow. Switching back to the old system, response times appear to be instantaneous. I'm used to even longer delays when there is a lot of data (especially brand new locations) to be added, even with the old system, but this is long delays for everything, even adding cast members who already have other credits in IMDB.

0

0

percy_ware_armitage

8 Messages

 • 

140 Points

9 years ago

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled auto completion.

Unfortunately, the auto completion function does not work any more on the IMDb Pro Contributor Beta page...this should be corrected in order to post new data more rapidly...

2

0

percy_ware_armitage

8 Messages

 • 

140 Points

this is not related to my personal computer settings, as it still works with the old IMDb Contributor page...

9 years ago

0

percy_ware_armitage

8 Messages

 • 

140 Points

this problem still occurs and hasn't been solved yet

9 years ago

0

davidah_ca

Champion

 • 

1.9K Messages

 • 

92.6K Points

9 years ago

I agree with the many comments that the vertical spacing is too large. I found it particularly egregious in the item headers in the Quotes section. The selection boxes are nearly 3 times that height of the text.

Another problem  is Status in the Director section in pre-production films. In this case it is the width of the field, which is well over twice the width of the Selection box itself. The result is that the Attribute field is too narrow when the item is set to Correct, and actually sticks out to the right of the item when set to Keep.

2

0

Peter_pbn

Champion

 • 

14.4K Messages

 • 

329.9K Points

Some input fields seem to have widened considerably, such as keywords, even though keywords are usually short. After I check the updates the fields are shorter, but taller.

9 years ago

0

Peter_pbn

Champion

 • 

14.4K Messages

 • 

329.9K Points

It also appears to me that field browsers are missing in some cases where they are usually present: the company field in the company forms, the attribute field in the distributor form, perhaps others.

9 years ago

0

davidlichauco

2 Messages

 • 

124 Points

9 years ago

Having issues today with saving (not submitting) submission and opening the saved submissions. I keep getting what look like "404" errors.

0

0

martin_695862

611 Messages

 • 

13.7K Points

9 years ago

Minor formatting problem in Producer field: occupation drop-down box is partly obscured by an over-height box for free-form occupation text: http://s9.postimg.org/hofs471jz/producer.png

1

0

owenrees

442 Messages

 • 

14.5K Points

This should be fixed now. Thanks for reporting it.

9 years ago

0

percy_ware_armitage

8 Messages

 • 

140 Points

9 years ago

There's a problem with the radio buttons right now while adding new information: you can chose the options but the marker does not appear...

6

0

owenrees

442 Messages

 • 

14.5K Points

Could you give an example of where you are seeing this problem please. Radio buttons are working as expected in the places I tried. If it is happening for you for all radio buttons, could you say what browser you are using in what sort of system.

9 years ago

0

percy_ware_armitage

8 Messages

 • 

140 Points

Yes, the problem occurs with any radio buttons recently. It was fine in the first weeks of trial, but has been a constant problem within the last week.  I'm using Internet Explorer 9 on Windows Vista Home Premium.

9 years ago

0

owenrees

442 Messages

 • 

14.5K Points

Thanks for the information. It looks as if this is an issue with IE9 that does not affect other browsers. Now that we know where to look it should not take long to fix.

9 years ago

0

percy_ware_armitage

8 Messages

 • 

140 Points

Sounds good! But I wonder why it worked in the first weeks and now does not any more...

9 years ago

0

owenrees

442 Messages

 • 

14.5K Points

This should be fixed now. If the radio buttons still do not look right in IE9 please let us know - a screenshot of an example would help us to be sure that we have reproduced the problem if there is one.

9 years ago

0

percy_ware_armitage

8 Messages

 • 

140 Points

Excellent, everything's fine now!

9 years ago

0

carter_hayes

104 Messages

 • 

3.2K Points

9 years ago

I'm not sure if this has already been mentioned (I'm in a rush because it's Thanksgiving here, not much time to read/browse this thread) but when correcting/deleting/adding awards, the "To update data for categories that aren't listed above, select this box" has no effect for me when check marked. Proceeding with "Check these updates>>" doesn't produce additional categories as before. I'm using Firefox 41.0.1.

0

0

Related Conversations

Loading...

Helpful Widget

© 1990-2024 by IMDb.com, Inc.