#190923-101331-649000
I think, the above is self-explanatory.
____________________________________________
#190923-220816-192000 & #190923-212339-114000:
These two complex corrections are submitted to one and the same trivia item, but actually they do not duplicate each other. According to the official guidelines, there is no problem and it is OK when a contributor submits additional changes later to an item that he/she contributed before.
First, I submitted complex changes in #190923-212339-114000 (multiple links addition), but later I submitted more additional links (those were found later in the descriptive parts of the movies in the list) and, moreover, I also added formatting for this trivia-list to have a pleasant look similar to this one: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0462071/trivia?item=tr0702992 (open the spoiler to check the whole list).
The above steps resulted in the final submission declined and the first one pending. Nonsense.
I think, the above is self-explanatory.
____________________________________________
#190923-220816-192000 & #190923-212339-114000:
These two complex corrections are submitted to one and the same trivia item, but actually they do not duplicate each other. According to the official guidelines, there is no problem and it is OK when a contributor submits additional changes later to an item that he/she contributed before.
First, I submitted complex changes in #190923-212339-114000 (multiple links addition), but later I submitted more additional links (those were found later in the descriptive parts of the movies in the list) and, moreover, I also added formatting for this trivia-list to have a pleasant look similar to this one: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0462071/trivia?item=tr0702992 (open the spoiler to check the whole list).
The above steps resulted in the final submission declined and the first one pending. Nonsense.
Posted 10 months ago
Well, "The 100 Greatest Scary Moments" situation takes a new turn... scary or funny?
They approved the first submission, that would be a good sign in most cases, but now it is not feasible to resubmit the final variant, because:
They approved the first submission, that would be a good sign in most cases, but now it is not feasible to resubmit the final variant, because:
-
When visit the czone (https://contribute.imdb.com/updates/history), and click those links under 18-digits:
there are only current data, the same for both submissions (partial screen here):
-
When use the "Track contribution" option, the whole text of 100 strings is not seen because of the SPOILER:
Michelle, Official Rep
Hi MAthePA -
The trivia item for "New Girl" has now been corrected with the links: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1826940/trivia?ref_=tt_ql_trv_1
Concerning "The 100 Greatest Scary Moments", I can see the approved trivia item here: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0488907/trivia?ref_=tt_ql_trv_1. To clarify the issue, are there still titles in this trivia item that need to be hyperlinked?
The trivia item for "New Girl" has now been corrected with the links: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1826940/trivia?ref_=tt_ql_trv_1
Concerning "The 100 Greatest Scary Moments", I can see the approved trivia item here: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0488907/trivia?ref_=tt_ql_trv_1. To clarify the issue, are there still titles in this trivia item that need to be hyperlinked?
Hi, Michelle.
By the first submission, I corrected the bad title-links and after approval it now looks like this:
By the second submission, that is declined, I added a dozen of useful links and the formatting, so the whole list should appear like this (the new links are green underlined):
The content of second submission is remade anew to show you the difference. Is there any reasons preventing the second submission from approval? May I proceed?
By the first submission, I corrected the bad title-links and after approval it now looks like this:
By the second submission, that is declined, I added a dozen of useful links and the formatting, so the whole list should appear like this (the new links are green underlined):
The content of second submission is remade anew to show you the difference. Is there any reasons preventing the second submission from approval? May I proceed?
Well, since the content is remade for "show room", I risk to resubmit it to finish this uncomfortable situation. But for all contributors it would be great to know, at least, was it an accident or otherwise our later submissions contradict the previous ones where they should append?
Peter, Champion
If I had additional corrections for an item I had already corrected, I would wait for the first submission to be processed. Anything else is needlessly complicating the process.
I agree, it is one of the possible ways.
But there is neither reason, nor official guidelines stating that other possible ways are wrong or "needless". Depending on a situation, a contributor may need those other ways if they are not prohibited officially.
If I would be an editor, I approved both submissions - one by one as they submitted, - or declined the first one and then approved the final variant. It is logically motivated.
Anyway, our speculations on what could be do not answer the question: our later submissions contradict the previous ones where they should append?
But there is neither reason, nor official guidelines stating that other possible ways are wrong or "needless". Depending on a situation, a contributor may need those other ways if they are not prohibited officially.
If I would be an editor, I approved both submissions - one by one as they submitted, - or declined the first one and then approved the final variant. It is logically motivated.
Anyway, our speculations on what could be do not answer the question: our later submissions contradict the previous ones where they should append?
(Edited)
The resubmitted one is now approved and live:
In view of all the above steps, it would be great to have an official explanation on how the standard invitation really works (or should it be added with limits):
"You may make changes to this batch and submit it again, in which case all of the data (not just the changes made now) will be resent to the data managers."
In view of all the above steps, it would be great to have an official explanation on how the standard invitation really works (or should it be added with limits):
"You may make changes to this batch and submit it again, in which case all of the data (not just the changes made now) will be resent to the data managers."
