IMDb Name Page BETA OPT-IN

Hi @bderoes​ -

Beginning today you will see a floating button in the lower right corner. It provides the opportunity to opt-in; and  links to our help page to learn more and submit feedback. On the new page, that same button provides an opt-out opportunity to return to the old page.

Cheers!

Michelle 😀

I did a quick look at a new Name page earlier today
Too bulky with large photos and junk

Do not need a giant size poster for every title listed

30 More \/
30 More \/
30 More \/

emailed a message to Jon at the Help Desk

Need to add a way to select old version 

https://www.imdb.com/preferences/general

Name pages
[_]  Old View  [_] New View

You have ...

Contributors
[x] Show reference view

@ACT_1​  Thanks for the feedback.  The “30 more” is a temporary experimental situation while we are still working on the pages.  We are aiming to strike the right balance between how many credits to load initially and when to have a “Show all” option to display the rest.  Thanks for confirming that 30 is too small. 

I use the Show All link on a regular basis.

I don't see that on the new design.

And I don't just need it within a category; I truly want all credits displayed in case some acting thing shows up in Self.

The context, in case it helps: when searching for an opera on IMDb, it's useless to search for the title. With dozens of productions of the same thing, and different spellings, different languages, it just doesn't yield useful results. Instead, I look up one of the principals, and search for the title on their CV. Some are mis-categorized as TV-special, and therefore appear under Self. Show All is important.

On the help page for this:

https://help.imdb.com/article/issues/GMWASETVPLJYXEZE

it this paragraph:

For any other feedback, please add a comment to this Sprinklr thread.

That Sprinklr thread is about the "new" Title format, back in 2020.

@bderoes​  Thanks for the feedback.  The pages are a work-in-progress  

The missing “Show All” is a known defect, thanks for adding weight to the fact it is a much-needed feature (I am a regular user of it myself). It will be added later in the beta, but it was not considered a launch-blocker now given the beta is opt-in — the team were keen to collect early feedback on the overall experience of the new pages even though there are some things which still need to be addressed. 

Hope this helps. 

@ACT_1​  wrote:

Need to add a way to select old version 

This is an opt-in beta, so if you would like to see the old version, please opt-out :-)

Once the new name pages are completed and fully launched there will not be an option to display the old version as those pages are based on a non-responsive, non-localised technology which is 12+ years old and has significant issues and is due to be retired.  There is no “reference view” equivalent for names, sorry. 

@ACT_1​ 

Thanks, but we don't need the Wayback Machine.

Open the same page in 2 different tabs/windows, and turn the new view on/off in the lower right corner.

@bderoes​ 

? ?

Wayback show "Actress (21 credits)"
all combined - not 
Actress: TV (11 credits)
Actress: Video (5 credits)
Actress: Movie (4 credits)
Actress: Documentary (1 credit)

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1125732/

- - -

Col_Needham:
Once the new name pages are completed and fully launched
there will not be an option to display the old version as those pages

.

@Col_Needham​ 😀

Some of us can read text 
and do not need a large poster to see the titles

New page is pretty with graphics
Old page was helpful to look at Information - the reason for IMDb

Book vs. Magazine

Actors' photos are small on title pages
If you have to have title posters
make them the same size as actors' photos (click to enlarge)

to get more titles on a page ??

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110912/reference/

- - -

Computer :

See the New version 

https://www.imdb.com/preferences/beta-control/?e=name&t=1&u=/name/nm0001682/

Back to the Old Version 

https://www.imdb.com/preferences/beta-control/?e=name&t=0&u=/name/nm0001682/

Mobile:

See the New version 

https://m.imdb.com/preferences/beta-control/?e=name&t=1&u=/name/nm0001682/

Back to the Old Version 

https://m.imdb.com/preferences/beta-control/?e=name&t=0&u=/name/nm0001682/

for

Mickey Rooney (I)
(1920–2014)
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001682/

Actor: Movie   (169 credits)
Actor: TV         ( 85 credits)
Actor: Short    (  82 credits)
Actor: Video    (   9 credits)

Wayback Machine
http://web.archive.org/web/*/https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001682/

JUNE 22, 2022
http://web.archive.org/web/20220608143927/https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001682/

JUNE 2, 2004
http://web.archive.org/web/20040602230332/https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001682/

  with IMDb message board for Mickey Rooney

- - -

Can the 155,000,000 users vote for this: Old vs. New  ??

https://www.imdb.com/user/ur155000000/

Maybe just the 6 or 7 Staff members decide this ??

.

@Col_Needham​ It's not that "30 is too small". It's that any finite limit is too small. Leave it as it was, to display every credit that an actor has. At the very least, make the finite/infinite limit a per-user configurable setting.

@martin_695862​  Thanks for the feedback, yes, this is all part of the experiment. 

Could be that the IMDb Staff does not use IMDb to look up ... 
   What's that actor's name??   

   What was the name of that other movie or TV show I saw him in??
like the millions of us Registered Users and other visitors

They just want to keep busy and keep their jobs at IMDb
SO, they have to make changes ??

   Hey! Let's add a lot of pretty posters and pictures !!

.

@ACT_1​ 100% agree
I also think that the people that design the websites and game developers NEVER use the page nor play the game....it's all about how "creative" they can be and "flex" their brain muscle...and go..."LOOK AT ME"...I can do this...I'm great!!!

@Col_Needham​ STOP EXPIERMENTING AND LEAVE IT ALONE!!!!

@Col_Needham​ 

Please tell us you were joking when you said this:

Once the new name pages are completed and fully launched there will not be an option to display the old version as those pages are based on a non-responsive, non-localised technology which is 12+ years old and has significant issues and is due to be retired.  There is no “reference view” equivalent for names, sorry. 

The users don't seem to have any problems with the current version (what you are calling the "old" version). What do you mean when you say this version is "non-responsive," "non-localised," and "has significant issues?" Those labels are all quite vague. Can you be more specific? 

I find it hard to believe that IMDb cannot retain the current version as a "reference view equivalent." If it's true that there "significant issues" with this version, why can't these unidentified "issues" simply be addressed? That would be a more appropriate endeavor, rather than trying to reinvent the wheel.

@keyword_expert "I find it hard to believe that IMDb cannot retain the current version as a "reference view equivalent." If it's true that there "significant issues" with this version, why can't these unidentified "issues" simply be addressed? That would be a more appropriate endeavor, rather than trying to reinvent the wheel."

I fully agree. That issue is being dodged by Col who seems to be peddling the view that in order to correct the behind-the-scenes code-maintenance problems, it is necessary to force everyone to use the kiddies' dumbed-down user-interface.

Contributors need tools to do their job. The job that we are doing out of the kindness of our hearts for you. You are blunting our chisels, rubbing out the paint on our tape-measures, throwing sand into the screw of our vice/vise. If the tools become too difficult to use, people will stop contributing.

By all means develop a pretty (but IMHO useless) UI for the punters - if you are satisfied that this really is what they want (and I'm not convinced about that). But keep providing the contributors' tools - the reference view that lists all titles for an actor, or all cast (in credits order) for a title . Yes, it's a bit more work for you to develop and to maintain. But it is essential. Unless you want no future data to be submitted to IMDB...

@martin_695862​ I think the belief is that contributors will continue to work for free. After all, where else can they go? What contributors want no longer matters, only what raises more ad revenue. 

@JohnB​ "I think the belief is that contributors will continue to work for free. After all, where else can they go? What contributors want no longer matters, only what raises more ad revenue."


Col. Over to you now. Convince us that you do still value the contribution that we make to the accuracy and completeness of the database. Give us back the tools that we need to do our job. Users of the site (as opposed to contributors) will probably benefit too.

Col? Are you still there? Are you still listening to us? You've been rather quiet since we started to tell you some home truths in this thread. I realise you are not the right person to answer some of these issues, but you are our only point of contact. Please feed back our heartfelt concerns to the people who are forcing this change on everyone. Keep IMDB as it used to be: well-respected and usable. You created it: it's your "baby" to keep in the way that you founded it.

@keyword_expert​ 

The current title reference view is not a former main title page, but a specially designed page. The equivalent for name pages would be to design a new name reference view with the currently preferred technology. This also seems to me to be a more likely proposition.

When the current title reference view was announced, the former name reference view was discontinued: "While the differences between the primary title display and the title reference view are significant, the differences between the name displays were less extreme." With the new primary name design, perhaps the difference would be more significant.

@martin_695862​ 

Are you still there?

Sorry, I have been away on a business trip to the US since last Wednesday (my first time back here since the pandemic hit) .  I was able to answer earlier because it was the weekend and so I do not have meetings / emails / deadlines / etc on Saturdays and Sundays (or not as many at least :-).  It is now my regular work week, sorry. 

I am helping the team out by replying here when I can so that they can continue to concentrate on doing the actual work of fixing the bugs, making the appropriate suggested changes, and evaluating the potential ideas (plus looking at the usage data for the new pages vs. the old ones). I have given some of the context across the earlier parts of the thread, and so at the moment, I am prioritising comments which report new bugs / missing data. I will catch-up when I can on the more general comments. 

Hope this helps. 

@Col_Needham​ Good to hear from you again! I quite understand that you are prioritising the bugs/missing data at the moment.

I think the main concern of our increasingly frantic and assertive (but I hope still polite and helpful) comments was to make sure that things didn't change by default, without our comments and suggestions being considered. Did I understand correctly that the new system was due to be introduced in "early August" - ie in a week or so's time?

Can I make a suggestion? In view of the amount of negative comments and the big issues that have been brought up, can IMDB consider postponing the replacement of the old name reference view with the new pages, so as to give all your developers and team leaders chance to take the comments on board, and not to do anything hasty.

If, after that, IMDB chooses to disregard the comments it will be a crying shame for the future of IMDB, since some contributors are threatening to leave, but what would be even worse is if the new system was introduced without our comments even being looked at and at least considered. Thanks.

@Peter_pbn​ said:

The current title reference view is not a former main title page, but a specially designed page. The equivalent for name pages would be to design a new name reference view with the currently preferred technology. This also seems to me to be a more likely proposition.

If this is correct, then @Col_Needham should clarify whether such an option will be on or off the table. The contributors in this thread are begging IMDb to keep as an option the ability to continue viewing the name pages in their current format (or something as close to the current format as possible).

It just seems odd that IMDb would spend so much time completely redesigning the name page (and now will be spending a lot more time fixing all the bugs that have come to light) and yet there is little to no indication whether IMDb is willing to give its contributors their simple request: retain a "reference view" version of the name pages as an option. 

@Col_Needham​ 

You just tell the Staff about problems like "30 More \/" that needs fixin

IMDb Staff spent a lot of time (and money) doing the "Old View"
Just keep it!!!
You can add these ___ redesigned Name Pages

with a different link to them
Give everyone a choice here!!

and you can see what they choose 😲

- - -

You do not use IMDb to look up Names to see their filmography

.

@Col_Needham​ Does this mean you won't have a list view as an option? I mean it doesn't have to be the same coding as the old one but that gallery/grid view is the most annoying style to view. iTunes pulled that same nonsense but they had to good sense to leave us the list view as an option. The gallery/grid is such a pain to skim through. I used to work customer service, so I know that one person saying "I come here all the time and now I'll never be back" means nothing, but for real, this is a 'never coming back' change for me. Please, please, please leave a list view option. Even if I have to click it every time I go to the page, I'm fine with that.

@LeftLegFirst​ 

? ?

With over 155,000,000 Registered Users
IMDb may not care if a dozen Users never visit again

https://www.imdb.com/user/ur155000000/

.

@ACT_1​ Thank you for pointing that out, even though I said it in my comment. Did you know that they have over 155m registered users?

@LeftLegFirst​ 

I keep some stats on Users and other IMDb stuffs

From:
https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/top-300-contributor-leaderboard-for-june-2022/62c43e90e929921253c79d50?commentId=62c4675b4e50b32a94bbc7e9

IMDb User count

rosaneobrito
Fri Jul 1 2022
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur154200932

seanandsarah 
Wed Jun 1 2022
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur153351896

beckyspill 
Sun May 1 2022
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur152496821

rbfrjshpj 
Fri Apr 1 2022
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur151629869

qvqcdq 
Tue Mar 1 2022
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur150344723

twardowski-24301 
Tue Feb 1 2022
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur149325337

nashleeteamo-85176 
Sat Jan 1 2022
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur147786058

- - -

Okie doke.

@Coreena​  Please sign this petition to stop these changes of being made.

https://chng.it/xtprF89H

SiteCritic: I doubt the petition will help much, but here's a live link to make it easier for people to access:

https://www.change.org/p/stop-imdb-from-getting-a-new-look

@gromit82​ Just so you know - went to sign the petition, was not allowed to make comments and when finally clicked sign - was immediately redirected to pages of adverts - just like the new IMDB page maybe ?? :-(

@LeftLegFirst​  There's now an update on this at https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/imdb-name-page-beta-optin/62db09f1e232bb632089ba01?commentId=62e2c60527c9e55d81c713c9&replyId=62e2dd17c998636027ae4ca3 

@Col_Needham​ Update the old page keeping the old look! Is that not possible? 

@michael_paliobeis​  No, sorry.  The old pages are built with unmaintainable out-dated technology which should already have been retired and which is not suitable for current customer needs.  As noted, we are working on an update to the new pages which will provide a sticky option to display the filmography in a simple table without the posters / ratings / etc. 

@Col_Needham​

So, if I understand correctly, this new technology you use cannot use the old design? This new tech cannot put up a design like the existing Name page? Really?! I do not know that much about these technologies, but that does not seem reasonable. Plus, "a sticky option to display the filmography in a simple table without the posters / ratings / etc.”, seems contradictory to me.

As for “not suitable for current customer needs”, well, who’s needs? What needs? My needs regarding the current Name page are taken care of just fine thank you.

Use my previous idea: ‘After the finalized New Name page is presented you should keep the switch back button to the current Name page for at least 90 days. See how many viewers, over time, choose the old look or the new look.’

In this scenario, if the New Name page look is used less than the older Name page, you then need to find a newer technology to keep the older (now current) design.

Aren't the viewers the most important people?

@martin_695862​ Agree

@ACT_1​ Agree

@bderoes​  The “show all” support is now available. There’s a top level equivalent of show all at the end of the category menu, labelled “All” — it’s easier to spot on name pages with a smaller number of categories, for example, https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0428065/  We are looking at other placement options which will work better for all names so this is still a work-in-progress. 

Also, each individual filmography category now has an “All” option in addition to the “30 more” — a good test of this is https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000229/  (which, of course, makes it temporarily a bad test case of the “Show all” equivalent in the previous paragraph :-)

The team are continuing to work on the filmography tabular view preference. 

@Col_Needham​ 

I used Joyce DiDonato's page, because so many of her credits are within the anthology series from the Metropolitan Opera. (And that credit is still missing from her Actress category since she also has appearances under Self.)

The All works for individual titles, but not TV series. Only 1 card is displayed, and I have to find it, and open it to see her multiple episodes. Which means that using ctrl-f (browser Find) does _not_ find an episode title (example Cosi) as it does under the old view. (Odd that it _does_ find a character name: Agrippina, but you can't really see _where_ it is.)

The All option should be listed next to the Sort option button instead of at the end of the category list. Because Spielberg has so many categories, you have to use the Arrow button twice to find the All button.

Looking forward to the tabular display.

@bderoes​ 

The All option should be listed next to the Sort option button instead of at the end of the category list. Because Spielberg has so many categories, you have to use the Arrow button twice to find the All button.

Thanks, yes, that's one of the potential placements.

@alyssa_amodei​  Thanks for taking the time to provide your feedback.  The pages are a work-in-progress, and as you will see elsewhere in this thread, fixes for some of your issues are in the pipeline.  We wanted to provide the option for people to comment early vs. when everything is finalised.  For things not already in the pipeline, your comments will help shape the next steps. 

@alyssa_amodei​ 

I've started a petition to stop the changes. If we get enough steam, these Amazon changes could be stopped!

https://chng.it/xtprF89H

@alyssa_amodei​ Agree with this completely. For a desktop view, this is awful. The current page is concise and lets the user see everything in one go. It takes multiple clicks to see what I can currently see on initial page load. A redesign should make things more efficient, not more complicated. Why not give us a list view as an option?

@slanskye​

Thanks for the feedback, please see our update yesterday at https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/imdb-name-page-beta-optin/62db09f1e232bb632089ba01?commentId=62e80718c998636027af1350 specifically:

@don_wood_5537932​  Sorry about that.  We have asked the team to update the FAQ.  You should see a little timer / clock icon in the lower right of the page.  If you click on the icon, there’s a “Go Back” link in the menu which pops-up. 

@Col_Needham​ 😀

Not easy to find for all those not reading this ??

.

Oddly, it looks like a cookie/biscuit. Not sure why the text "Go Back" couldn't be used.

I hope you are keeping stats on how many people do actually go back. The format looks similar to the iOS app... and that format is the reason I rarely use the app.

@don_wood_5537932​ 

I've started a petition for the New Amazon look to stop its changes to IMDB.

 Please help up get enough signatures to stop these changes.

https://chng.it/xtprF89H

@Dinosauce​  Thanks for taking the time to comment. 

@Dinosauce​ 

I've started a petition for the New Amazon look to stop its changes to IMDB.

 Please help up get enough signatures to stop these changes.

https://chng.it/xtprF89H

@Col_Needham​ I agree completely with @Dinosauce At least give a list view option.

@slanskye​ You are commenting on last week's comments, please scroll to the top of page 1 of this announcement :-)

@bderoes​  Thanks, yes, this is another known bug (and glad you spotted it). If someone has self credits on a series, it sometimes obscures their acting credits or vice versa (Adam Sandler’s earlier acting credits obscure his later hosting credits on SNL, for an opposite example). 

The “Show all” requirement to also include episode details is a good catch, thanks. 

More missing credits and inconsistent display, still for 

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1125732/

Compare her totals on the old format:

In addition to the series missing under acting, she's missing this title:

2002: Il barbiere di Siviglia (TV Movie)
Rosina

And under Self, she's missing:

2003: Gala Jean-Philippe Rameau - Concert du 20ème anniversaire des Musiciens du Louvre (TV Special)
Mezzo-soprano

@bderoes​  Thanks for confirming this bug.  This is also on the list and will be addressed before the pages go fully live.  The specific examples are useful as there are different reasons why some of the counts are mismatched. 

@bderoes​  The “by type” setting is not currently sticky and neither does it read the existing preference, so we will take this as the first request to support this.  Thanks.

Thanks on the genre exclusion (and we will be adding shorts to the excludable set too).

@virtyaluk​ You should see this on any name page, click "See new version":

@mbmb​ 

Are you talking about this feature?

@mbmb​ Thanks for the feedback.  This also a known bug which affects a small number of names, and it will be fixed before the pages go fully live (thanks for reporting it though). Do you remember on which names you saw this problem? 

@bderoes An example name we already have logged with this bug is Samara Weaving. 

@Col_Needham​ I think the behaviour I'm reporting happens on every page. It's not like that "Samara Weaving" page which happens as soon as page is loaded.

For example this name page mentioned in an above post: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1125732/

Click "Self" once to enable it, click it again to disable it and click it again to enable it again and in this step, it says "Credits excluded."

As far as I can tell this happens on every name page. It's possible I saw it happened with the first click too but my memory could be wrong on that and can't remember the name page as I was quickly checking multiple random name pages.

@mbmb​  Thanks for clarifying.  Good catch on a new bug there! 

@mbmb​  We have fixed the Samara Weaving case but not (yet) the open/close bug. 

@mbmb​ 

Click "Self" once to enable it, click it again to disable it and click it again to enable it again and in this step, it says "Credits excluded."

This is now fixed too, thanks again for spotting it. 

@Col_Needham​ Thanks for these updates.

@domsickles​  Thanks for the valuable feedback. 

@ddb_mnr​  Thanks for taking the time to comment.  The pages are definitely a work-in-progress.  Regarding the excessive subpages, the “30 more” links are a temporary experimental situation while we are still working on the pages.  We are aiming to strike the right balance between how many credits to load initially and when to have a “Show all” option to display the rest.  Thanks for confirming that 30 is too small. Related, a one-click “Show All” for all sections simultaneously is also on the list. 

On the speed front, sorry to hear on the load times.  May we ask in which country are you located and (roughly) how fast is your internet connection (visit https://fast.com or your speed test provider of choice)? 

@ddb_mnr​ "I'd really like to see the contributors build a new site for their data along the lines of the way Col Needham had imdb about 1998 before Amazon came in and everything got messed up.  With a video collection of about 50K titles and wish lists of hundreds of thousands of lines I'll attempt to continue using imdb, but it is really looking like in a couple of months this user will be gone for good."

Yes, it is "our" data - not in a legal way, but in a moral "result-of-sweated-labour" way. We've invested time and trouble, for the love of doing a job accurately and completely, and it is a crying shame to see it going to hell in a handbasket.

I too will struggle on when (not if) the changes become imposed on everyone. But at some point I too will be saying "sod this for a lark - it's just too difficult now".

If I could find it after it was built I'd be a regular user and give up imdb for good very happily