Skip to main content

69 Messages

 • 

2K Points

Mon, Dec 31, 2018 3:14 PM

Now this is just plain ridiculous



Does someone of your staff just press buttons randomly or what?

Responses

4.1K Messages

 • 

133.3K Points

2 years ago

Now this is just plain ridiculous
by Saluton
Joined on December 16, 2017
https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/people/saluton
- - -

? ?

Cimarron  (1931)
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0021746/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0021746/reference

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0021746/trivia
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0021746/trivia?item=tr0679221
This film has the lowest IMDb rating (6.0)
of all Best Picture Oscar winners as of December 2017,
along with Cavalcade (1933).

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0021746/ratings
4,617 IMDb users have given a weighted average vote of 6.0 / 10
- - -


Cavalcade  (1933)
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0023876/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0023876/reference

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0023876/trivia
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0023876/trivia?item=tr1911150
As of December 2018,
this film has the lowest IMDb rating (6.0, along with Cimarron (1931))
and the fewest IMDb votes out of all Best Picture Oscar winners.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0023876/ratings
3,812 IMDb users have given a weighted average vote of 6.0 / 10
.

69 Messages

 • 

2K Points

What's the point of your reply?

4.1K Messages

 • 

133.3K Points

Cavalcade  (1933)
As of December 2018,
this film has the lowest IMDb rating (6.0, along with Cimarron (1931))
and the fewest IMDb votes out of all Best Picture Oscar winners.

Changed from
As of December 2017,
this film has the lowest IMDb rating (6.0, along with Cimarron (1931))
and the fewest IMDb votes out of all Best Picture Oscar winners.


What's the point of your original comment ? ?.

.

69 Messages

 • 

2K Points

"They are based in the UK"
Seriously? I thought US.

Employee

 • 

8.8K Messages

 • 

223.7K Points

2 years ago

Hi Saluton -

I can see that this requested trivia update should have been approved, I have now corrected the year in the trivia item and the change is live on the site: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0021746/trivia?ref_=tt_ql_2

Thanks again, and Happy New Year!

4.1K Messages

 • 

133.3K Points

Hi! Michelle, Official Rep

I can see that this requested trivia update should have been approved:

- - -

Now:
Cimarron  (1931) 
Trivia
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0021746/trivia?item=tr0679221
This film has the lowest IMDb rating (6.0)
of all Best Picture Oscar winners as of December 2018,
along with Cavalcade (1933).
- - -

I have this posted above - was not useful to others here

Old
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0021746/trivia?item=tr0679221
This film has the lowest IMDb rating (6.0)
of all Best Picture Oscar winners as of December 2017,
along with Cavalcade (1933).

.

17 Messages

 • 

732 Points

2 years ago

Just chiming in because I had this same issue a little while back. In short, I assume it's some kind of back-door bugginess happening specifically when the "other" field is used. I don't know for sure if it was officially resolved after my last post, but it did go away after a while. However, I noticed it happening again on a recent submission, so idk...

Also, re the use of "current" dates (ie "As of xxxx..."), I remember reading in a style guide a long time ago that the language used was preferred to be timeless, so that phrases like this were actually not preferred and should be left out. Otherwise, a lot of effort would have to be made to make sure they are perpetually updated. Tbh, I always remove those phrases when I come across them (but won't here) for that reason. Has this guideline since changed?? I couldn't find it anymore.

ps My 2-cent interpretation of ACT_1's post was just to provide links and words, which were "not" provided in the original post because it was just pictures. I'm not trying to stir things up, I just also think he means well.





69 Messages

 • 

2K Points

No, correcting the dates doesn't take a lot of effort. A quick Google search once a year (not even a Google search in this particular instance), then "Edit page" and you're good. But whether trivia related to IMDb ratings should be posted is indeed subject to discussion because this information can be viewed as provoking to vote and rate differently.

17 Messages

 • 

732 Points

Yes, I agree. If it's just a few or a few handfuls, then it's not such a big deal. The real work comes from the potential of hundreds (thousands?) of entries to be corrected yearly. Plus, you have to remember which ones or at least find them all again. You could write a code for that, but the corrections still have to be submitted by hand. And I know people aren't doing that very well because the majority I come across are several years old, like 2014, 2012, a few were even older. Out of all the corrections I did this past year, only one or two had 2017 or 2018.

69 Messages

 • 

2K Points

2 years ago

"Problem solved", heh heh. The problem is not that an item wasn't updated. It is that someone doesn't understand what they are doing.

6.2K Messages

 • 

153.1K Points

Who is to say that the problem of failing to understand was not solved as well? If there is another incident of just plain ridiculousness, then please let the IMDb Community know.

17 Messages

 • 

732 Points

My point is that it's not someone per se, but some bit of code or algorithm that's not understanding.

BTW I really hope it doesn't seem like I'm picking on you! I think we can agree that whatever is going on needs to be fixed.