"Unable to Verify" rejection form letter ignores submitted verification #200624-190744-966000

  • 1
  • Problem
  • Updated 1 month ago
  • Not a Problem
I submitted a credit correction, but it was denied because IMDb was "unable to verify." I then submitted again, this time listing multiple sources of verification, and within 24 hours received the same generic form letter rejecting the credit again. This is unacceptable. If you're going to ask for verification you have to be willing to actually verify, not just ignore with another form letter. As a paid subscriber, I expect better and need this corrected ASAP.
Photo of rmattbill1

rmattbill1

  • 6 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
  • angry

Posted 1 month ago

  • 1
Photo of Grayson

Grayson, Employee

  • 196 Posts
  • 378 Reply Likes
Hey Matt - checking your submission you did not provide any sources, just listed methods we could use to verify your credit. Our data editors approve new credit requests and other data based on evidence provided by the person who wants to add the credit.

A guide on submitting evidence with your credit is posted here: https://help.imdb.com/article/contribution/contribution-information/how-can-i-submit-additional-verification-for-a-credit-submission/GN93ME9NVXHVE36E
Photo of rmattbill1

rmattbill1

  • 6 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
I resubmitted and this time included not one but two links verifying the information, and I got yet another generic form letter say imdb couldn't verify. How can we get this resolved, because whatever automated service you're using isn't working.
Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 23311 Posts
  • 27775 Reply Likes
Hey rmattbill1.
If those links are video URLs then a specific time of appearance needs to be listed. Hours, Minutes and seconds.
If it is a printed article and it has more that a paragraph or two, then you need to list Paragraph number and the line number(s).

Editors will list an "Unable to Verify" if your submitted data is very large and too time consuming to read or view.

Thanks.
:):)
Photo of rmattbill1

rmattbill1

  • 6 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Jesus, for $150 a year that's not exactly what I would call great customer service. And given that denying someone credit is about the worst thing IMDbPro can do, they ought to be willing to put a little more effort into this before repeatedly rejecting someone's claim.
Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 23311 Posts
  • 27775 Reply Likes
I pay the same $150 a year you do! I have no problems submitting contributions. I play be the sites rules. I make sure that it is "Easy" for an editor to "Quickly" verify any contribution I submit. Do these things and you'll have no issues.
Photo of rmattbill1

rmattbill1

  • 6 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Maybe someone needs to introduce them to the command+f shortcut, as that plus my name would take even a slow typer all of about ten seconds. Also, they should've verified BEFORE deleting my credit, as it is a huge waste of my time to correct their mistake. Frankly, I'm not convinced a human is reading any of my submissions.
Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 23311 Posts
  • 27775 Reply Likes
This has been marked as not a problem at the top.
You made no mention that this is the replacement of a credit that was removed.
They will not replace that credit without you providing ironclad evidence.

Matt said that you........... did not provide any sources, just listed methods we could use to verify your credit.

They (IMDb) does no research. You provide the research. That is what I do as a paying IMDb member. That is what millions (Yes Millions) of others do too.

You are not special. Please provide the information.
Will no longer reply.
You are just arguing now for arguments sake.
Please do as Grayson advised.
Thanks.
Photo of rmattbill1

rmattbill1

  • 6 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Wrong Ed, I am not arguing just for the sake of arguing. I submitted not one but two URLs, one from the WGA addressed to me re: credit, the other a Deadline article in which I am mentioned in paragraph 3. They are not even trying to verify, nor are they even looking at this evidence. Your faith in a completely non-transparent system is misplaced. Just because it worked for you doesn't mean it's working for anyone else.
Photo of rmattbill1

rmattbill1

  • 6 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Of course it's been marked as not a problem. Imdb will clearly do anything to avoid addressing this issue. Par for the course at this point. Going to ask the WGA to handle as I've now wasted hours over the span of two weeks trying to get a correction for which I have ironclad proof. Outrageous.
Photo of Ed Jones(XLIX)

Ed Jones(XLIX)

  • 23311 Posts
  • 27775 Reply Likes
Please use only this method https://help.imdb.com/contact