Good evening. A couple of months ago, I discovered that the FAQ of this movie https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3398268/?ref_=ttkw_kw_tt is unnecessarily speculative and erroneous, but when I tried to report it, I discovered that the form of the message does not imply opportunity to substantiate the complaint. After my complaint was rejected (or ignored), I also tried to rewrite the FAQ, but apparently this also had no effect.
Perhaps it would be better if I could explain in the comments why I consider this FAQ to be false, but this feature is not provided.
So, I would like to ask, what can I do in this situation? Such a FAQ is not only very speculative (I have not found a single serious source that would confirm the reality of this interpretation), but also creates a rather offensive interpretation of the work, suggesting that its subject is the implied incestuous relationship between the girl and the seducing her grandmother.
For an example of the fallacy of such an explanation, I can advise you to watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reFhaZSLCj0&hd=1, which sufficiently clarifies all the questions about its content.
Perhaps it would be better if I could explain in the comments why I consider this FAQ to be false, but this feature is not provided.
So, I would like to ask, what can I do in this situation? Such a FAQ is not only very speculative (I have not found a single serious source that would confirm the reality of this interpretation), but also creates a rather offensive interpretation of the work, suggesting that its subject is the implied incestuous relationship between the girl and the seducing her grandmother.
For an example of the fallacy of such an explanation, I can advise you to watch this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reFhaZSLCj0&hd=1, which sufficiently clarifies all the questions about its content.
Posted 2 years ago
What should I do then? In its current form, the FAQ is pure speculation, but I do not know how I can convey my point of view without any opportunity to justify the problematic nature of this page.
(Edited)
The rewritten version was rejected as “non-compliant,” which I can understand. But my past complaints were rejected as "not having enough evidence". Which is very strange, given that the form of the message does not allow you to leave any comment.
So, how can I add a justification for my action if the form of appeal does not allow it at all?
So, how can I add a justification for my action if the form of appeal does not allow it at all?
What are the reference numbers?
Will, Official Rep
Hi Andrew,
Have you got the submission reference for the amendment and I can take a look?
Regards,
Will
Have you got the submission reference for the amendment and I can take a look?
Regards,
Will
Hello! Yes, I saved all the answers thanks to the user's link above, but I don’t know if you can see them. But if necessary, I can copy them. Reflecting on the previous dialogue, I tried to rewrite the text once more, this time more widely, but there was no answer yet.
Michelle, Official Rep
Hi Andrew -
You can find your submission reference numbers by logging into your IMDb Account and viewing your Contribution History: https://contribute.imdb.com/updates/history , all your submissions will be displayed.
You can find your submission reference numbers by logging into your IMDb Account and viewing your Contribution History: https://contribute.imdb.com/updates/history , all your submissions will be displayed.
https://contribute.imdb.com/contribution/190109-081600-320704 Well, here I tried to rewrite again, this time writing a more detailed text. To which, in response, I received "Not enough evidence" without any justification or indication.
But then what is meant by "evidence"? In this case, there was also no evidence in the original text, as it contains only speculation and ignorance of the Japanese language (the film does not use uniquely romantic words, this is a lie). Or do they want to tell me that the evidence = statements?
Or should I bring the video I already mentioned? I am more and more confused about all this, for all the answers are too ambiguous and never indicate what I did wrong.
But then what is meant by "evidence"? In this case, there was also no evidence in the original text, as it contains only speculation and ignorance of the Japanese language (the film does not use uniquely romantic words, this is a lie). Or do they want to tell me that the evidence = statements?
Or should I bring the video I already mentioned? I am more and more confused about all this, for all the answers are too ambiguous and never indicate what I did wrong.
(Edited)
Michelle, Official Rep
Hi Andrew -
Thanks for the additional details. I can see that your FAQ correction should have been approved, I have now approved edits and they are now live on the title page: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3398268/faq?ref_=tt_ql_op_2
Thanks for the additional details. I can see that your FAQ correction should have been approved, I have now approved edits and they are now live on the title page: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3398268/faq?ref_=tt_ql_op_2
Thank you for your help. So the problem was that I did not indicate the material that could be referenced to verify the information?
