| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 16, 2007 |  Posts: 278 |
| | Posted: | | | | Reason for decline: Sources for one or more of the changes and/or additions were non-specific. Please specify the exact source for your changes. (e.g. "Credits from film end credit list", "Previous version UPC#1111111111")
Actual contribution notes: No change to overview, invelos propagated data
Full Cast & Credit from each episode |
|
| Registered: March 18, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,550 |
| | Posted: | | | | Been there but it's just an honest mistake I'm sure. |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 6,730 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting The Movieman: Quote:
Been there but it's just an honest mistake I'm sure. Would be my guess too. Just give it a retry, or ask Ken to overrule the screeners decision. | | | It all seems so stupid, it makes me want to give up!
But why should I give up, when it all seems so stupid?
Registrant since 05/22/2003 |
|
| Registered: March 10, 2007 | | Posts: 4,282 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Leiterfluid: Quote:
Reason for decline: Sources for one or more of the changes and/or additions were non-specific. Please specify the exact source for your changes. (e.g. "Credits from film end credit list", "Previous version UPC#1111111111")
Actual contribution notes: No change to overview, invelos propagated data
Full Cast & Credit from each episode I think it's the first part that threw the evaluator: "invelos proagated data". My guess is they saw that and thought it applied to the whole contribution, and so were looking for the source to be included. There is a change in the overview or else it would not show as contributable. Likely it is in the whitespace. You may wish to elect not to check the overview for the contribution in that case to reduce confusion. I've overridden the declines. | | | | Invelos Software, Inc. Representative | | | | Last edited: by Ken Cole |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Ken Cole: Quote:
There is a change in the overview or else it would not show as contributable. Likely it is in the whitespace. You may wish to elect not to check the overview for the contribution in that case to reduce confusion. I am seeing quite a few contributions where the only thing contributed is the overview, with the notes "auto-filter overview." Are you saying that there is some change in these overviews that just isn't visible? There are a lot of people who seem to think this is an auto formatting change.  | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar | | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
|
| Registered: December 10, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 3,004 |
| | Posted: | | | | The program changed how it does mark-ups a couple versions ago, so there are updates that don't actually show anything. |
|
| Registered: May 29, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,475 |
| | Posted: | | | | Before I contribute I refresh my local database. Why then, if I have not changed the Overview, does it sometimes show up on the contribution page?
It is my understanding that this occurs because invelos has implemented something that updates the Overview as applicable. | | | | Last edited: by Kathy |
|
| Registered: November 24, 2008 | | Reputation: |  Posts: 1,289 |
| | Posted: | | | | Whenever I submit an Overview change that I didn't alter, I state -
"No change to Overview - HTML update"
That seems to do the trick. |
|
| Registered: May 11, 2007 |  Posts: 249 |
| | Posted: | | | | I always include the following in my notes:
The Overview was not changed, but somehow is flagged that way. This is a known issue, resolved by including it in a contribution.
I've never had a decline on that statement. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 79 |
| | Posted: | | | | Occasionally there are submissions where this type of overview mark-up update is the only change. I'm always tempted to vote 'No' quoting the 'Make sure your contributions add significant value to the database.' rule, but I've held back.
Am I missing something here? Is there a real point to these updates? I would appreciate if someone could explain what value these updates add. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,202 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Exiled: Quote:
Am I missing something here? Is there a real point to these updates? I would appreciate if someone could explain what value these updates add. I have actually started wondering the same as I have a LOT pending right now where that is the only change. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar | | | | Last edited: by TheMadMartian |
|
| Registered: May 11, 2007 | | Posts: 249 |
| | Posted: | | | | Every time I've contributed, it was in a combination with another update as the difference in the overview does not show up in the preview changes window.
As far as I know it only shows up when a contribution is done, so if I see a difference is detected I include it in the contribution. |
|
| Registered: May 11, 2007 | | Posts: 249 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Exiled: Quote:
Am I missing something here? Is there a real point to these updates? I would appreciate if someone could explain what value these updates add. Basically it is repairing a minor error in the database. Not sure I would contribute this as the only change in a profile though. |
|
| Registered: March 18, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 1,641 |
| | Posted: | | | | I was bitten by this bug as well today as of 11:10AM. I submitted a new profile and mentioned that all contributed data was taken directly from the disc and cover art as appropriate. A little odd since I've seen new contributions which only had "initial contribution" or "new contribution" for the contribution notes. And the only thing the decliner took the time to provide as a rationale was some generic statement of: "Sources for one or more of the changes and/or additions were non-specific. Please specify the exact source for your changes. (e.g. "Credits from film end credit list", "Previous version UPC#1111111111")" If the contribution was going to be declined for some petty reason at least the reason could be more specific by not using a precanned response. What did the reviewer not like about the contribution notes?  My guess it may be due to the credits which actually came from the film credits NOT IMDB or some other online source. Frustrating ... |
|
| Registered: June 15, 2012 |  Posts: 428 |
| | Posted: | | | | There is some strange weirdness going on with contribs at the moment, I think a poltergeist has gotten into the system  No truly, I have had a number of weird things happen over the last week eg: thisHow a contrib can be approved and denied at the same time, I don't know. No reason is available for the decline. Oddly though I think it was approved as the online now matches my local.... I have had contribs go missing and all sorts of stuff recently. As most people have advised, just re-submit the profile again. |
|
| Registered: March 11, 2009 | | Posts: 211 |
| | Posted: | | | | A contribution that shows up as both approved and declined was declined by accident, then approved. |
|