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 Henrietta Dooley

Henrietta Dooley

  • 3 Posts
  • 15 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled reference view.

I only ever want to look at reference view and it seems to still be working normally for movies/shows, but actors' pages are coming up in the new view and I really do not want to use the new view ever.
Photo of Grégory Alexandre

Grégory Alexandre

  • 16 Posts
  • 46 Reply Likes
This is just breaking my heart. Col, you have to be aware of that (not that my heart is broken, but that many other IMDb users/contributors hearts will be broken, and that's a lot of broken hearts !). The old display was easy, clear, I got so used to it in almost 20 years, it was just familiar. Now it's gone... I know there has been a battle over it 7 years ago and that we old-timers managed to have the old set up remain. Somehow I thought it would last forever. Nothing does... as it seems. It's like a breakup with someone. Sorry to get melodramatic over this matter but this really is a matter to me. I'm now just wondering how my "relationship" to Imdb will be affected, if I'll keep on wanting to work on it as much as I did. We'll see.
Photo of Jo Jesua

Jo Jesua

  • 3 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
Totally agree with Grégory
Photo of Col Needham

Col Needham, Official Rep

  • 6834 Posts
  • 4818 Reply Likes
If it helps any, we wrote this on another thread recently ...
Nothing has changed in the fundamentals of what is in the Contributors' Charter @ https://contribute.imdb.com/charter nor what we are doing and what we are about in the help section (and history and press room) @ https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/general-information/what-is-imdb/G836CY29Z4SGNMK5 -- the changes allow us to do all of these things better and faster. 
Photo of Grégory Alexandre

Grégory Alexandre

  • 16 Posts
  • 46 Reply Likes
Thanks Col. I guess it's not helping much, but thanks anyway. I'm mourning the loss of something good-looking and sharp in favor of something ugly and uncomfortable to watch and use, whichever way I look at it. They always say "yeah sure, they'll be crying for a few days but they'll get used to anything". My question is just "was it an absolute necessity to shut down the old display ? Was IMDb losing money over it ?"
Photo of Kevin Howard

Kevin Howard

  • 3 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Thanks Gregory. Couldn't have put it much better myself. Unfortunately I can't find a view that I'd want to share with anyone, or use and update myself. This is a huge step in reverse for IMDB users. What a shame that our prefferences are being ignored.
Photo of Kevin Howard

Kevin Howard

  • 3 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
Also, "Known for" has to be selectable  by the users or gone from the profile view.
Photo of Alan

Alan

  • 8 Posts
  • 23 Reply Likes
Yet more deterioration of service. First episode casts now this.
You seem determined to ruin this site.
The "modern" view is nowhere near as good.

How for example do you show all job sections by default. Or do you really have to press the "Show All" button every time you look at an actor's name? I can't see anything in the site preferences to control this.
Photo of michael kirby

michael kirby

  • 3 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
I am also extremely disappointed. One click and I could see all the actor's credits on one screen.
 
Now, I have to click on about 7 screens to see all the relevant data.

The average Joe who is uninterested in sections such as soundtrack and archive may not care..

However for the concerning viewer, (some of which saw a need to create this website), it certainly appears a backward step.

And something which technology surely could overcome.the bugs.

These are the types of things which make this website superior to other wannabes.
Photo of michael kirby

michael kirby

  • 3 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
On a further note, by removing the old reference view, I have now found they have taken away episode numbers of tv series.

Instead of 40 of 165 you only get Season 2 Episode 1 (165 episodes).

So if you want to work out the episode number, you have to open the episode lists and calculate.

Absolutely frustrating for when you're trying to work out episode numbers for Series 14 of a show like I am at present.
Photo of John Seal

John Seal

  • 12 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
Indeed. I also discovered this today...another frustrating change. 
Photo of plur62

plur62

  • 17 Posts
  • 54 Reply Likes
Why you doing this to us, Col?

Another extremely disappointed user and contributor.
(Edited)
Photo of RW

RW

  • 11 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
The reason we use reference view isn't because it looks like the old site, it's because it's significantly more useful.  I thought the reason it was called "reference" was it was intentionally supposed to be more database or library-like for those of us who work professionally in the industry and related fields and need easy access to all of the actual information at a glance.

If I upgrade to IMDb Pro will I then have access to reference view again?

Please don't remove the combined view from movies or that would be catastrophic for a lot of people I work with.  Thank you.
Photo of Charles Trotter

Charles Trotter

  • 33 Posts
  • 57 Reply Likes
So it seems IMDb has decided to force the "new" page layout on us despite the fact that nearly everyone prefers the old reference view. This would enrage me if I didn't see it coming a mile away. The folks at IMDb have done nothing to improve the site over the years; they've only made it worse by removing useful features and making the site more grotesque and harder to navigate. They completely disregard input from their users and contributors and instead just implement every unnecessary, unwanted and unsightly alteration they can think of, and the site suffers because of it. I'm sick and tired of it, to be frank, and if the reference view really is gone for good then you can count me out as a regular visitor. I cannot use this site if I have to look at that god-awful layout. IMDb, please, don't take away the reference view option. You need to listen to your users and contributors and LEAVE. SH*T. ALONE. You are only making things worse for us and for the site. Please stop.
Photo of Henrietta Dooley

Henrietta Dooley

  • 3 Posts
  • 15 Reply Likes
If you have to take reference view offline for a little while while you update the software that runs it, fine. But I think you should seriously reconsider removing it altogether. Is there no way to build the site in the reference view with the new technology? I know everyone says this but there's truly no reason for me to ever use this site if I can't see reference view. Please listen to all of us. Keep the new version the default but give us an option, please.
Photo of Peter

Peter, Champion

  • 6632 Posts
  • 8083 Reply Likes
If there will be a 'combined' title page setting, maybe there could also be an alternative name page view to see the full filmography and omit other page elements.
Photo of James Lane

James Lane

  • 2 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
This is a deplorable decision.

I’m not wasting time arguing about it. Because I can see that there’s no discussion to be had.

It's apparent – by the extremely limited amount of people (8 at this point) showing concern about this – that Imdb will consider the “problem” irrelevant. Hence, their minds are not going to change over any argument, no matter how reasonable.

Been a regular, everyday user for 17 years. I guess loyalty counts for nothing?

I'm out. Bye.
Photo of Charles Trotter

Charles Trotter

  • 33 Posts
  • 57 Reply Likes
Exactly. They couldn't give less of a sh*t about us, and make no mistake, we do represent the majority; we're just the only ones who bother to seek out this forum and comment. And they've pretty much just given us the middle finger by going ahead and removing the reference view entirely; we can't even access it manually any more. That's their answer right there. So you're right, no point in arguing. They've made their decision and whether users and visitors are happy or not is irrelevant. I will continue to update the IMDb lists I'm currently working on, but once I'm done with those, I'm pretty much done with this site as well.

It really is a shame. I've been a frequent visitor for over 20 years and a registered user for 16, and have watched in vexation and disappointment as the site's quality and accessibility drastically diminished the pleas and suggestions of users and contributors are ignored. It used to be my favorite site, but now it's just a mess -- one the powers that be will have to clean up if they want us to continue visiting.
Photo of RW

RW

  • 11 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
It took me forever to even find this forum so I could make my comment above.  After skimming through the fairly useless help pages looking for an e-mail contact link I finally stumbled on this and wasn't even sure it was real considering it's on an entirely different website.  After which, by the way, I had to create an completely new account because it's not linked to my IMDb ID.  All told, just to find a place where it was being discussed probably took me 20 minutes, and I doubt most people would go through that effort, even if they were genuinely angry.

When my work colleagues this morning told me that IMDb had removed the reference view I laughed and said that was impossible.  You couldn't believe the look of shock on my face when I tried my own account and saw it was true.

I know IMDb doesn't have a legal or financial obligation here, but if they're going to take on the mantle of being the gatekeepers to all information about TV and movies then I would say they have an ethical responsibility to at least have the option to deliver that information in a way that's actually usable.

First and foremost IMDb is a tool, and let's be real, a database of information (IMDb anyone?).  And then, somewhere way down the list, it's an entertainment site.  Somewhere along the way IMDb seems to have forgotten itself. 

Pro Tip IMDb Overlords: There's thousands of wannabe entertainment websites, but there's only one true Internet Movie Database
Photo of Chris

Chris

  • 3 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
I've been using IMDB for a long time but I'm using it much less these days after the message boards were removed. Getting rid of the reference view may just be the last straw for many people. I know it is for me. I may end up having to use IMDB in the future but it will only be after exhausting all other sources if information on the internet.
Photo of vhavnal

vhavnal

  • 389 Posts
  • 290 Reply Likes
Another good feature IMDb just killed.. Congrats ...it looks like the only time i post here is when IMDb destroys a good feature..reference view/combined view was very useful to us "contributors", now updating will be harder as we had scripts that worked perfectly for reference views ....*sigh* ...can't wait for the next good thing they destroy ...probably Title reference view.......R.I.P Names Ref/Combined view.
(Edited)
imdb is going down. like myspace years ago. stupid changes for nothing.
Photo of Adam F.

Adam F.

  • 1 Post
  • 5 Reply Likes
Just wanted to throw in my $0.02 that I MUCH prefer the older "reference view".  The new look is garish and seems solely designed to be looked at from a mobile device.  I get that a lot of people want that look, and it doesn't seem significantly difficult to provide users options for what look they prefer.  
Photo of rpupkin

rpupkin

  • 4 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
yet another platform consolidation "improvement" catering to mobile that leaves desktop/laptop users in the dust
(Edited)
Photo of rpupkin

rpupkin

  • 4 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
i just checked my IMDb profile.  i've been a member since June 2000.  i've contributed corrections & additions (mostly external reviews) in the hundreds.  i won't be contributing an more.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7265 Posts
  • 9469 Reply Likes
Thanks for the corrections and additions, rpupkin. And assuming you're not bluffing about ceasing, farewell.
Photo of Mikko

Mikko

  • 1 Post
  • 4 Reply Likes

The lack of AKA titles in filmography pages is a major problem for me. About 50% of the time I know a film by its original title (e.g. Japanese, English) , and about 50% of the time by the English title only (e.g. Chinese, Korean movies). No matter whether I choose "original" or "English" as the title display language, half of the time I won't recognize the titles on the filmography pages, and I need to check each film page to learn what film it is... Which takes so much time. Couldn't we please have the AKAs back? At least an option to view titles in both "original" and "user selected" languages at the same time?

Photo of Col Needham

Col Needham, Official Rep

  • 6834 Posts
  • 4816 Reply Likes
This is good feedback to help guide where we go with this, thanks. 
Photo of ACT_1

ACT_1

  • 3622 Posts
  • 3500 Reply Likes

Mikko
The lack of AKA titles in filmography pages is a major problem for me
- - -

Col Needham, Official Rep
This is good feedback to help guide where we go with this, thanks.
- - -

Maybe add to

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

[__] Hide AKA titles


Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7265 Posts
  • 9469 Reply Likes
ACT_1, hell yeah.
Photo of RW

RW

  • 11 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
I'll second the AKAs missing.  It's a real issue, and not even for obscure stuff.  I mean if you go to Penelope Cruz's page where's Abre los ojos?  That's a reasonably popular movie with a Spanish title and you can't find it scrolling and you can't find it using a webpage text search, you can only find it if you already know that the English translated title is Open Your Eyes.  There's about a million examples of that obviously.

Similar to this, the Actor/Actress Alternate Names used to be at the top under their name, and now they're buried at the bottom of the page in the Biography section, but mysteriously, if you click the Biography button at the top and go to the Biography page there's no Alternate Names.  The Alternate Names/AKAs need to be at the top underneath their main IMDb name as that's an extremely important piece of information that if you don't have immediate access to you're going to end up potentially linking people improperly or creating new entries unnecessarily.
Photo of cyber_turnip

cyber_turnip

  • 19 Posts
  • 36 Reply Likes
I knew this day would come, but I'm very sad. The classic version of the site is so much better for a variety of reasons that I won't go into. I'm a heavy IMDb user and I very, very rarely encountered bugs or slow speeds on the system.
Photo of Tom Patten

Tom Patten

  • 6 Posts
  • 46 Reply Likes
I've seen so many websites follow the same fate by starting off strong and then going downhill a few years down the line, thinking simplicity and catering to casual visitors is a step forward. As a result, the desktop site suffers because mobile phone apps can't show the same amount of information. They change the skins and the features of the site completely and assume people will just get over it. It's a load of crap!
Photo of Nicolai Laros

Nicolai Laros

  • 1 Post
  • 5 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled New Layout!!!! Why, why, why!!!.

What the hack is going on Imdb? Why can't we see all the infos about movies as for example "alternate version" etc. anymore!!! I hardly needed all this stuff! Wasn't this new outfit supposed to be better and help us!
Photo of Quaraxkad

Quaraxkad

  • 1 Post
  • 3 Reply Likes
I'm just seeing this new layout, or rather the lack of the old layout, today. And I thought I was the only one who would miss it. I'm glad to see that's not the case. The current layout is absurd and unusable. It follows the current design trend of "more wasted space, less useful information". I don't know what more there is to say that hasn't been mentioned in this thread already. If the old /reference layout still works, just re-enable it. If it doesn't, there's absolutely no reason why just one lone designer couldn't whip up a new version that matches the old format in appearance in a few hours works.

I can only hope they don't do the same to /combined, that would be an even bigger failure.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7265 Posts
  • 9469 Reply Likes
Title Combined View is not going away exactly, but it will be replaced by a variant supported by the new software platform. It's hard to explain what it will look like, using words. We might not be pleased, though.
Photo of Dave

Dave

  • 1 Post
  • 8 Reply Likes
Well, I had to create an account to add my voice to the chorus here. Many others have already made much better worded arguments as to why reference view is better than the bloated "new" view, so I'll just say I agree with them 100%. The forums are gone, episodes cast isn't working, and now reference view is on the way out. IMDb just keeps getting less & less useful. I hate to sound like the guy who says things like  "remember when MTV played music videos?", but there's a reason people say that! Change does not necessarily mean progress! Please keep some form of reference view!
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 7265 Posts
  • 9469 Reply Likes
Photo of mentor

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 J.D.Foley

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:

I DEMAND THAT YOU GIVE US BACK THE OPTION OF DECIDING FOR OURSELVES WHICH DESIGN/LAYOUT WE WANT TO SEE AND USE !!!

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! >:-<

PLEASE GIVE US BACK OUR PREFERRED LAYOUT, PLEEEASE, I IMPLORE YOU !!!!!!!!!!!!

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.
I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT IT IS OVER !!!! That my IMDB IS OVER !!!

PLEASE GIVE US BACK THE REFERENCE VIEW FOR NAMES !!!
At least give us a fair option

PLEEEEEEEASE

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

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......

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.