Quoting StefaanD:

Quote:
Then what was wrong with my first contribution ? It reads as follows;

[i]source 3388330043100

- front & back cover ( own scan )[/i]

only thing to make it a bit more clearer was i needed to add UPC or EAN: so like this;

Source for what data? This was an initial contribution and you gave same UPC as a source which you are contributing. Where did you take Cast & Crew, running time etc. from covers or from the disc? In my eyes decline for this was completely understandable.

Quote:
I remedied this in my second attempt

[i]- copy from EAN:3388330043100
- front & back cover ( own scan )[/i]

now tell me what was wrong with the second attempt ??

Same thing as with the first attempt. Your contribution notes doesn't make much sense.

Quoting StaNDarD:

Quote:
Sorry, but did you ever check the link StefaanD gave in his first post?

I did, and I still don't know where did he take the Cast & Crew for example. The only thing here which needs explaining is why was the third attempt accepted? It should have been declined as well as the two before.

Quoting rdodolak:

Quote:

Maybe I missed it somewhere but where are you seeing he submitted cast and crew?

I previewed the profile from online db and it has partial Crew and (full?) Cast.

Quoting StefaanD:

Quote:
now you also accuse me of calling names to people i don't even know. That does it.

You did not?

Please (with my limited abilities of reading) allow me to quote you:

1.

Quote:
... pffttt. Come on guys and gals who is doing this kind of shiitake mushroom. Now i also see the reason why there's no name for whom declined a contribution.

2.

Quote:
Also seems someone doesn't know what EAN means and we have to use UPC instead 

Quoting StaNDarD:

Quote:
[...] it seems Lewis is just judging by assumption.

Not quite,
I'm judging on the statements given in the uncorrected OP as they can still be read in the second post of this thread.

After the statement "3rd attempt for this title, i even used the wrong UPC ( the one from Moulin Rouge! digibook )" I saw no reason anymore to check what was actually contributed. Since the fault seemed quite obvious.
Although it's not fine, for a new contributor this fault is excusable.

The problem arose when another user advised StefaanD to write a (more or less) obvious lie.
I asked why he should want to do this, since obviously he did not use the wrong UPC accidentally.

StefaanD understood this as direct attack against him, the rest is history.

Quoting Lewis_Prothero:

Quote:
Quoting StaNDarD:

Quote:
[...] it seems Lewis is just judging by assumption.

Not quite,
I'm judging on the statements given in the uncorrected OP as they can still be read in the second post of this thread.

After the statement "3rd attempt for this title, i even used the wrong UPC ( the one from Moulin Rouge! digibook )" I saw no reason anymore to check what was actually contributed. Since the fault seemed quite obvious.
Although it's not fine, for a new contributor this fault is excusable.

The problem arose when another user advised StefaanD to write a (more or less) obvious lie.
I asked why he should want to do this, since obviously he did not use the wrong UPC accidentally.

StefaanD understood this as direct attack against him, the rest is history.

You may be right Lewis but is it not an assumption that he used the wrong EAN on purpose?  What would that accomplish as it could and should increase the probability of the contribution being declined.  In StefaanD's original post he never said he did it purposely and you could also read that he did it accidentally but noticed it and the irony in it after the fact.

It appears StefaanD also contributed an update to 3344428043391.8 [Moulin Rouge!] on 18 May.  Is it possible he simply grabbed the wrong disc or copied the EAN from the wrong notes?

Quoting rdodolak:

Quote:
You may be right Lewis but is it not an assumption that he used the wrong EAN on purpose?  What would that accomplish as it could and should increase the probability of the contribution being declined.  In StefaanD's original post he never said he did it purposely and you could also read that he did it accidentally but noticed it and the irony in it after the fact.

It appears StefaanD also contributed an update to 3344428043391.8 [Moulin Rouge!] on 18 May.  Is it possible he simply grabbed the wrong disc or copied the EAN from the wrong notes?

I guess something like this has happened. I can't proof it, but "In dubio pro reo".

Quoting TheDarkKnight:

Quote:
I am still a little confused about the contribution notes.

Me too...

Quote:
Did you take all the information from the disc and cover or did you copy/clone another profile?

And if the information was taken from the disc and cover... which info was taken from disc and which from cover?