Can one of the staff members check submission 170518-092045-170000 and see if there is a problem.
http://www.imdb.com/czone/times shows the oldest unprocessed Production Status to be Friday 26 May.
- King Charles III (2017) (TV)
- Production / Development Status - Add
-
Status: Released
Update: 18 May 2017
-
- Production / Development Status - Add
http://www.imdb.com/czone/times shows the oldest unprocessed Production Status to be Friday 26 May.
Posted 3 years ago
Michelle, Official Rep
The status is OK on IMDBpro but still seems to be wrong on the normal IMDB site http://www.imdb.com/title/tt6253522/combined - here's a screenshot https://s12.postimg.org/5dzkck4h9/King_Charles_III.png
Peter, Champion
As Col would point out, you are referring to the old, however-many-years out-of-date reference view. It is odd that it is still showing the old status after several weeks, but they are probably not going to do anything about it.
There is no indication in the current view that the title is not released.
There is no indication in the current view that the title is not released.
OK. As long as it's visible on the www site (even if not the reference view) then that's OK. I just wanted to check that it wasn't confined to the Pro site.
What is the future for the reference site? I'd find it very difficult to manage without it, since it allows you to see complete cast (rather than first billed only, having to click to display the rest) and; it has a navbar with links to trivia, locations, goofs all in one place; it allows all the episode credits for a series to be seen in one place, which is essential for checking that someone hasn't changed an actor's name (as happened a few weeks ago with Ann Bell who became Ann Forrest Bell due a bit of vandalism); it has less wasted space because of adverts. I'd say that it's better in every way than the non-reference view, but maybe I'm biassed because I use the site as a submitter rather than a casual peruser.
The ideal solution would be for the *display* of reference view to continue, even if the coding behind it was updated to allow more rapid updates. But don't get rid of it! I mention this in case there were ever proposals to do it...
Sorry to sound off, but mention of reference view as being "however-many-years out-of-date" makes me nervous that its days may be numbered.
What is the future for the reference site? I'd find it very difficult to manage without it, since it allows you to see complete cast (rather than first billed only, having to click to display the rest) and; it has a navbar with links to trivia, locations, goofs all in one place; it allows all the episode credits for a series to be seen in one place, which is essential for checking that someone hasn't changed an actor's name (as happened a few weeks ago with Ann Bell who became Ann Forrest Bell due a bit of vandalism); it has less wasted space because of adverts. I'd say that it's better in every way than the non-reference view, but maybe I'm biassed because I use the site as a submitter rather than a casual peruser.
The ideal solution would be for the *display* of reference view to continue, even if the coding behind it was updated to allow more rapid updates. But don't get rid of it! I mention this in case there were ever proposals to do it...
Sorry to sound off, but mention of reference view as being "however-many-years out-of-date" makes me nervous that its days may be numbered.
