Name reference view

  • 28
  • Question
  • Updated 2 years ago
  • Answered
  • (Edited)
Archived and Closed

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies and is no longer visible to community members. The community moderator provided the following reason for archiving: Old thread

I have my IMDb account set to "Show reference view (old title/name page layout)."

Starting today, the site doesn't appear to be consistently following this setting. Some pages do view in the correct reference-view layout, but clicking a link to another page tends to undo this and present the unwanted new-style layout.

I can still manually access pages by appending "/reference" to the URL, so the feature is clearly still active - the site just seems to be ignoring my account preference for this view.
Photo of Stephen Schenck

Stephen Schenck

  • 2 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes

Posted 2 years ago

  • 28
Photo of mentor


  • 1 Post
  • 7 Reply Likes
At some point you have to ask if you're making the site for the owners/developers or for the users.  The fact that people still used it without updates for seven years longer than you wanted them to shows it would still have legs if you'd kept it running.

Go ahead.  We can't stop you from what you're doing to your site.  We can, however, use it less.  As your site is paid for partially by ad revenue, that's on you.
Photo of Gregg Koeppen

Gregg Koeppen

  • 1 Post
  • 6 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Totally dislike the new format when you click on an actor's name to see other thi....

Totally dislike the new format when you click on an actor's name to see other things they have appeared in. Please go back to original fornat
Photo of James


  • 1 Post
  • 2 Reply Likes
Great job! You've turned it into a unreadable useless pile of crap.
There's no point in even having an account if you're going to ignore you user's preferences.
Photo of J.D.Foley


  • 1 Post
  • 7 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled IMDb reference view.

Dear person(s) in charge at IMDb,

and pardon my french, but >>>WHAT THE F***<<< did you just do to the wonderful simplistic, clear and neatly arranged layout of the actor pages (and the episode ratings pages, and who knows what else you destroyed as well!)?!?? I am shocked!!! :-O

The now "new" view is totally and utterly BS!!!
An abysmal regression in clarity and usability!!! >:-<

A few days ago everything was perfectly fine, as it has been since the beginning (or at least give the users the option of checking a box in the general site preferences to get the "old look" back indefinitely, like it was until a few days ago!).

Today I wanted to look up some actors and firstly also thought I wasn't logged in, because I was given the new layout (which I back then, when you initially introduced this unusable crap, disabled instantaneously; back then we fortunately still had this option!).

The page design I was now given is this just recently revived flashy (but completely impractical!) layout mess, which I hate so much and have been hating since the first time it was introduced at IMDb! >:-<

There is a great and immensely user-friendly page design/layout out there, you already have it, and millions upon millions of people love it and do not want anything else (because: why change an already perfect environment!?!!!).

Why do you now forced this unusable crud upon us without an alternative?!?? >:-<

Hey, IMDb, please listen good:


You can not establish a great work environment and then, after years and years and years of people using it >>>and above all loving it very much!<<< just willy-nilly take it away, that is a very mean and sadistic move on your part!

Not to mention that this is NO PROGRESS AT ALL, but instead it is PURE REGRESSION! >:-<

Real progress would make using IMDb even more clearer and user-friendly, but apparently your definition of "progress" is to take away a all that is good and replace it with garbage!

I am very enraged about you now trying to take away the perfect and most ergonomic way of using IMDb from us, the users! >:-<


Kind regards,

A loyal IMDb-user for many a moons

Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: Upcoming changes to several IMDb features.
Photo of Grégory Alexandre

Grégory Alexandre

  • 16 Posts
  • 46 Reply Likes
OK people at the IMDB (most important site in the world for me)
It's been 6 days... and... I can't stand any second of the new layout.
Everytime I open a name page it's like a nightmare, I always (unconsciously) think "oh that bug, right, but it will go away, just close the page and think of something else".
but it doesn't go away.

I don't think I'll ever 'get used to it.

At least give us a fair option


What can I do for you to change your mind ?
Photo of plur62


  • 17 Posts
  • 54 Reply Likes
Must be some simple tool to bring back "reference" in URL, this is insane decision.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7261 Posts
  • 9458 Reply Likes
No. It's gone, until the IMDb developers implement a Name Reference View that is supported by the new platform, or if a decent, real-time API is introduced.
Photo of Sam Borowski

Sam Borowski

  • 5 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
This would not be a hard thing to develop. It seems as if they just don't want to give us what we want.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7261 Posts
  • 9458 Reply Likes
It might not be hard to develop, but if they do not want to do it, then they won't do it.
Photo of Leanne


  • 5 Posts
  • 11 Reply Likes
Obviously the designers of the new pages are children, they need lots of illustrations in pretty colours to hold their interest.  On the other hand, the adults who regularly use the imdb website as a reference source find the new look frustrating, distracting and useless, and want a return to the reference only context.  Is this really so difficult to do?  Just give us a choice, lots of distracting, slow downloading pictures, or text only - quite simple really.  I wonder how many users would opt for the pictures, and how many for text only......
Photo of Leanne


  • 5 Posts
  • 11 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled hate and loath new name page layout.

hate and loath new name pages - what are we, children who need coloured illustrations? How can I get rid of all the garbage you've put on the name pages and just have written information lists. It's taking forever to download the pages because of all the the redundant pictures.
Photo of Lorr


  • 2 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
Hi - Supporting the previous commentators, I'd like to chime in.

Please don't remove the reference view or add it back.

The new layout we're being forced to use is cluttered, unreadable and incomplete. It doesn't flow well. It's hard to fish out the most important information - what a certain person has done (it is, after all, what defines their career and therefore their existence on your site...)

We're not old and crusty change haters, the reference layout was just something that worked well for the intended purpose. So it should be no surprise that we're disappointed it is being forcibly removed.

You're alienating your most faithful and long-term user base.
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2901 Posts
  • 4888 Reply Likes
Can we extend the above request to the /combined view? I hate having to click to get further data, when (most of) all can be displayed on one single page. This is also why I much prefer the website rather than the app, which is only good for quick checks on the move. Thank you
Photo of Tue Sorensen

Tue Sorensen

  • 21 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled IMDb reference view.

So, WHOA, now (just now!) they just changed everything up again! Now the reference view looks much more like the non-reference view pages (which is damn annoying!), and all the left-side menus have moved to the right side! WHY? Change for the sake of change? At least give us a REASON! Maybe your ambition is to make the site uglier? That's certainly been a success.

Okay, so at least we now have the opportunity to adjust how many cast credits we want to see, and how many episodes of a TV show we want on the display list - all right, I'll count that as an improvement.

But: Why has the box office/business page been removed? Will it be back?

And the starred ratings now only appear as a number. What if someone comes to the site for the first time and sees a 7.8 rating. 7.8 of what? Without displaying all ten stars, people won't know that the ratings are about how many stars out of ten. It LOOKS STUPID.

Note: This conversation was created from a reply on: Update to User Reviews.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7261 Posts
  • 9458 Reply Likes
The left-side menus are a thing of the old platform. Nothing in the new platform ever looked like that. It's not change for the sake of change. It's more like change for the sake of uniformity.

How do I adjust how many cast credits I want to see? It seems to be dumping the full cast (which takes a long time to load), whenever I look at a TV series main page.

Regarding box office information and business stuff, please see the GS topic "Updates to Box Office on IMDb Title Pages & IMDbPro".
Photo of Tue Sorensen

Tue Sorensen

  • 21 Posts
  • 55 Reply Likes
I haven't tried for TV series, but in settings you can choose between full cast view and truncated cast view.

There's also the option to choose how many episodes of a TV show you want to have displayed - from 0 to all. This was one of the things that annoyed me before; that a filmography would only list 5 episodes of a show, and when you clicked on "more", it would just take you to the main show page instead of showing you the exact episodes you needed. That seems to have been taken care of, at least.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7261 Posts
  • 9458 Reply Likes
Okay, thanks, Tue Sorensen. I understand about the filmography settings, but was a little confused about the new cast list views.
Photo of vhavnal


  • 389 Posts
  • 290 Reply Likes
as expected, TITLE REFERENCE VIEW is now also gone, thanks for making IMDb suck again (Y) 
Photo of Col Needham

Col Needham, Official Rep

  • 6834 Posts
  • 4818 Reply Likes
Official Response
The title reference view has now launched on the new platform, please see
Photo of Bonnie


  • 1 Post
  • 2 Reply Likes
Totally hate the new design layout.  Really makes me not want to come here as it is hard to navigate and not pleasant to look at. Not a good decision, IMDB.
Photo of RW


  • 11 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
In attempt to be more positive than I have been, and to give some more constructive feedback, I will say I like the idea of the new button that separates the Movie and TV credits, however, I think they still need to both be expanded when you go the page.  Having only TV credits expanded and not Movies (or visa versa) doesn't make that much intuitive sense.  Separating them out is a reasonably good idea, but then giving preference to one or the other seems like a step backward where important information is being hidden in Reference view for no practical reason.
Photo of Misjn


  • 6 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Commented on the original thread on imdb boards when it happened and now here. The old layout is/was better, new one is not good. Use whatever you want by default on the site I don't care, but give people OPTIONS. Hate the "trend" of forcing dumbed down websites and software. Options please and thank you imdb.
Photo of aldiboronti


  • 15 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
Wouldn't it be a great idea if there were a database of movies for pure reference, shorn of all the flashy entertainment stuff in which serious film buffs could have all the information on titles, actors, etc presented to them simply and directly? There used to be such a place, IMDB I think it was called, but it got taken over by one of the big companies and rapidly changed for the worse, Sad.
Photo of David R

David R

  • 1 Post
  • 4 Reply Likes
I must say that I'm terribly disappointed in this decision.

Being a film buff, IMDb used to be my favourite website to visit and I couldn't possibly calculate the huge number of hours I've spent poring over film trivia throughout the years.

However, since the beginning of the seemingly never-ending changes (ditching of the forums, this retiring of the "old" page view, etc), which the powers that be have decided to implement, I've enjoyed visiting less and less. It may look prettier (though I don't see how) to some, but for those of us who visit and contribute regularly, it is no longer easy to navigate or user-friendly.

I really hope that the decision to retire the "old" page view is reconsidered, or I will be visiting the site much less often in future.
Photo of MADJiK


  • 10 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
IMDb have deleted my answer where I say they have not realized so much people still use the old design!

"Reason: Inaccurate information " ... Not so inaccurrate IMDb censor! Look at the number of answer here.

You should work on your design instead of censoring users opinion.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7261 Posts
  • 9458 Reply Likes
MADJiK, I know it's not funny, but...
Photo of cartman_1337


  • 418 Posts
  • 560 Reply Likes
I realize by now that you won't revert to the old views, but for name pages please do one of the following;

- change the current name pages to expand all categories per default

- make a new name page (call it reference view, contributor view or whatever you like) where all categories are expanded by default. If making a new view, please also consider condensing the view to one line instead of two per title. For instance, for Sean Connery it is enough that it says "Goldfinger (1964) ... James Bond" instead of
"Goldfinger                                                                                                          1964
James Bond                                                                                                                "
All professions in the media IMDb report on will do fine with one line per title instead of two, with the very rare exception of some extremely long titles that would get line separated anyway, those being a "problem" even now.

I often go in on a person's page, thinking "didn't I see him in so-and-so sometime, or was that someone else?", so I go in, click ctrl+f to use the browser search, enter my so-and-so title, and get no results. Before, when we had the reference view, that would mean I was thinking of someone else (or the 1% where I did a typo or something). Now, however, the TV credits may have been expanded by default, and the title I was thinking of was a movie (or vice versa), and thus doesn't show up in the browser search when that category is not expanded. It isn't exactly helpful, nor very modern to limit what we get to see, now that computers are more powerful than ever.

It is also super frustrating, as some others here have pointed out, that when you expand a category, click at title and then go back to the list again, the category is condensed again.

The option to always show ALL categories in full should be an option under General Options, along with similar options, like the title reference view. There should also be choices of whether you want to separate acting jobs by media (the current default) or show all acting jobs in one list. Personally I think it would even be useful to have a choice to combine ALL jobs into one list, for instance

Peter Jackson
Bad Taste (1987) ... Derek/Robert
Also Director, Producer, Writing, Film Editing, Special Effects

Such a view would make someone's career easier to follow, as well as making the pages a lot shorter, with a movie listed only once instead of up to a dozen.

I know people who registered an account on IMDb after 2010 solely for the reason of getting the name reference view, exactly because it had the option to always show all titles. We need that option back, regardless of what you call the view. I realize you may not want to make it the default view, as some name pages may get very long that way, but it should at the very least be toggleable in the General Options.
Photo of cartman_1337


  • 418 Posts
  • 560 Reply Likes
Thank you Jeorj. That view is indeed preferable to the current view. Still doesn't help expanding all sections, but a useful bookmarklet all the same. :)
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7257 Posts
  • 9452 Reply Likes
For expanding all sections of the filmography, there is:
var e=document.getElementsByClassName("hide-link"),i;
with javascript:(function()%7Bvar%20e=document.getElementsByClassName(%22hide-link%22),i;for(i=0;i%3Ce.length;i++)if(; as the properly-encoded URI.
Photo of cartman_1337


  • 418 Posts
  • 560 Reply Likes
Wonderful! :)

Now, if I wanted to combine the two scripts into one, what and where in the fist script would I have to paste this?
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7257 Posts
  • 9452 Reply Likes
To combine them into one bookmarklet, eliminate the beginning "javascript:" part (with the colon) from the bookmarklet URI that is to be appended to the other, and separate them by a semicolon. Alternately, one script could just be nested inside the other by pasting the content of one script just before the last right brace (right curly bracket) of the other, and including a semicolon right before the nested one. The scripts are independent of one another, so it doesn't matter which order.
Photo of Ben Osler

Ben Osler

  • 1 Post
  • 2 Reply Likes
I can't even find the Reply option on this thread and think I may be replying to a specific comment now! Sorry. It's bloody awful IMDB. It's changed over the last week and the site is now unusable as far as I'm concerned. I'll just stick to Wikipedia now for info on movies. IMDB is removed from favourites and it's off the grid for me now. Happy? You spotty Snowflake developers who have to change things to justify your existence really Pi$$ me off.
Photo of John Seal

John Seal

  • 12 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled English language titles.

Until recently, filmographies for 'foreign'  individuals listed each of their films original, non-English language title as its primary title, but also listed one or more English language variants. Now, only the original title appears. This makes it extremely difficult for non-native speakers to (for example) easily locate or identify a film by its (generally more commonly known) English title. For example, I do not read Italian; consequently it has become very difficult for me to peruse the filmography of Italian actors/directors and find what I'm looking for without guessing and/or clicking on multiple films to see if I can hit on the right one. Along with other recent changes which I've noted in other conversations, this has made the site a lot less user-friendly than it once was. Surely even IMDb's mobile interface (the reason given for so many other changes) could incorporate this simple and extremely helpful tool?

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.