64 Messages
•
1.6K Points
Problem with "(also archive footage)"
In these 2 titles
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0899196/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095949/
I put "(also archive footage)" in the field "Attribute" of some members of the cast, but this attribute, which appears in the edit page of these titles, is not just displayed on the page of the titles themselves, as if it had not been published. I think this is a bug to fix, since on the contrary "(archive footage)" and "(uncredited)" are displayed as expected.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0899196/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095949/
I put "(also archive footage)" in the field "Attribute" of some members of the cast, but this attribute, which appears in the edit page of these titles, is not just displayed on the page of the titles themselves, as if it had not been published. I think this is a bug to fix, since on the contrary "(archive footage)" and "(uncredited)" are displayed as expected.
Michelle
Employee
•
16K Messages
•
297.4K Points
8 years ago
On the Cast member's filmography page, the credit will be displayed under the "Archive Footage" category, for example, please look at the filmography for Ed Harris.
0
0
lorenz_pictures
64 Messages
•
1.6K Points
8 years ago
0
Michelle
Employee
•
16K Messages
•
297.4K Points
8 years ago
Perhaps I am misunderstanding the problem. I reviewed both titles you referenced, under
The Making of 'True Lies' I noticed that there are credits listed with both attributes "(archive footage) (uncredited)", however the other title, Karate Warrior 2, only displays one credit with an "uncredited" attribute.
Can you clarify the issue, "also archive footage" is not an attribute that we use, should the 'archived footage' attribute be removed for these cast credits?
0
0
lorenz_pictures
64 Messages
•
1.6K Points
8 years ago
0
dale79
228 Messages
•
5K Points
8 years ago
It is unfortunate though that it is possible to use it. It would be better if the attribute field was set up in a way so as to automatically not accept submissions of the supposedly redundant/inexistent attribute 'also archive footage'. Any ideas?
By doing a quick internet search I see there are still more than 9'000 instances of "also archive footage" present on the site. I guess this figure remains quite constant, for all of the removals, I presume that there are just as many additions going on at the same time, from contributors who believe they are adding something useful, when in fact they are utilizing an attribute that is not supposed to exist.
Whenever I have come across the redundant 'also archive footage' attribute on the programmes I am correcting, I remove it. I hope this is right!
0
lorenz_pictures
64 Messages
•
1.6K Points
8 years ago
0
0
dale79
228 Messages
•
5K Points
8 years ago
I also saw just now it is available in edit mode (but so are many other attributes/combinations!), as you correctly pointed out, but I have absolutely no idea why! Perhaps it was used/accepted previously. I don't understand its purpose and I myself feel it is superfluous/redundant.
0
0
lorenz_pictures
64 Messages
•
1.6K Points
8 years ago
In any case, I'm sorry but I do not know how to help you...
0
0
dale79
228 Messages
•
5K Points
8 years ago
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by 'main page'. The link you posted for some reason brings me back (reroutes) to the same page that I posted! So I do still see the various attributes 'also archive footage'! Bizarre!
0
0
lorenz_pictures
64 Messages
•
1.6K Points
8 years ago
0
dale79
228 Messages
•
5K Points
8 years ago
What I do is simply remove it from any listing that I am correcting. I have managed to get rid of a couple of hundred this way.
0
0
nobody_7029854
756 Messages
•
29.6K Points
8 years ago
But later, on July 29 2015, Michell wrote (in a reply in another thread):
3
dale79
228 Messages
•
5K Points
8 years ago
What is clear to me is that for as long as it remains an option in edit mode, some contributors will continue to employ it. The only way for it to be eliminated is for it to be removed as an option in edit mode, (then the remaining 9'000 or so examples of it that are still on the site would also need to be removed).
0
0
eboy
2.4K Messages
•
68.3K Points
8 years ago
0
0
dale79
228 Messages
•
5K Points
8 years ago
0
0