Unable to add voiceover credit to Paw Patrol movie

Just to add, we have submitted the photographic evidence of the credits with his name in the cinema, along with his birth certificate and headshot, but it's still rejected due to the language issue - happy to submit any additional evidence as needed. Thanks in advance!

Hi Maya, unfortunately I am not given an 18-digit submission reference number. The only message I get is: 

This credit has been rejected. You need to correct this credit before it will be accepted.

The selected language matches the title's primary spoken language.
Dubbing credits can only be added for languages that are not the title's primary language

I have re-uploaded all the evidence and the request but there is no reference number provided. Any ideas?

Thank you in advance for your help.

@AG4444_​- Thank you! We are further reviewing and we'll post below once we have further information.

@AG4444_​- Circling back, the reason why you are getting this message is because you have not been able to submit the credit and this is also why you do not have the submission reference number.

This credit should not be submitted as a Dubbing credit, instead it should be submitted as a regular voice cast credit and will need to have the attribute of (UK version).

You are welcome to make these changes and submit it so that it can be reviewed accordingly.

Hi, @Maya​:

...it should be submitted as a regular voice cast credit and will need to have the attribute of (UK version).

Does this mean there has been an official change to IMDb's guidelines? Because until very recently, these types of credits were ineligible for inclusion in the database.

I think that, to maintain consistency, the best solution would be to split the “English” category in the dubbing menu into “English (US)” and “English (UK),” just as French and Spanish are subdivided...

...or continue to consider them ineligible, like the other languages that are not currently accepted, or even variants of accepted languages that are not yet eligible, such as "Portuguese (Portugal)."

Cheers!

@Maya​ Hi, I have submitted his name as voice cast but there isn't the option of adding it under a'UK version' attribute. 

The reference number is: #260901-135652-398000.

Please could you help with next steps?

Thank you again for your help!

@ljdoncel​ - Hi,

Thank you for the feedback! This credit is not going into the dubbing credits because you are correct they are not eligible to be in voice dubbing as there is no English (UK). 

However, for these cases, what we do is not add the voice credits as dubbing credits but as regular voice cast, with “UK version” or “US version” next to the character name. For example, Thomas & Friends.

Apologies if this was not explained clearer above. We'll also pass the feedback to the respect team for visibility regarding the dubbing languages.

Cheers!

@AG4444_​ - Thank you for posting the reference! Further checking, apologies, the UK version part had to go next to the character name not on the attribute section. This has been corrected and the changes will be live shortly.

Hi, @Maya​:

However, for these cases...

Thank you very much for the explanation, but I believe this is not one of those cases. Thomas & Friends is a British series so the UK version is the original English dubbing and therefore eligible. In accordance with the established IMDb guidelines, the American English dub is also eligible and since in this series some actors play characters in both versions, it is necessary to add the parts UK, US or UK & US next to the character name.

On the other hand, PAW Patrol is an American series so the US version is the original English dubbing. What’s new to me—and what the classic guideline clearly prohibited—is that the British dub of an American series is now eligible for inclusion on IMDb (and moreover in the cast section, not the dubbing section), which opens the door to other similar exceptions, not to mention the well-known problems of assigning an appropriate order number to those actors.

I'm not complaining about this policy, but it catches my attention because, as far as I know, that's not how it was done before, and it certainly should be made crystal clear in the guidelines because it's a pretty significant change.

Thank you very much!