I contributed with my version of Man Hunt, including front cover.
Crew and cast belongs to other version, which I remarked. My contribution was released.
Up to this point all Ok.
A few days later I got the back cover and meanwhile there was an update in the database
that I accepted. In this particular Movie , update was bith year of one of the actors.
When uploading my contribution, I remarked " updated covers" and also spoted the new birth year that appeared. I did due as it was in the database , it is supposed to be previously accepted.

But got this answer

"Please use birth years only to distinguish between otherwise identical cast and crew. New birth year submissions must be documented."

This is what I dont understand, if this changes comes from the proper downloaded databese why must it be documented? Because frankly have no idea where it comes from.

K rgds
Q

Birth years are added to each profile in the online separately.

However they are added to each actor in your local database.

Therefore, when someone adds Film A with actor John Smith (1950) to the online, this birthyear shows up only for John Smith in Film A.

However, when you download the profile for Film A to your local database it adds the birthyear to John Smith in your local actor database.  So if you have Film B and Film C with him in it the birthyear appears there.

When you upload the profile for Film B you have to document that the birthyear for John Smith is valid, because as far as the online database is concerned, this is new to this profile.

This can be as simple as saying "propagating already approved BY for John Smith" and linking to the BY thread in the contribution forum.

Quoting TheMadMartian:

Quote:
It would help if you told us who the BY was for, but to answer your question, when you contribute a BY, you have to include the reason why the BY is needed in your contribution notes.  There are bad BYs in the database, that got in by accident, so this helps to keep them from spreading to other profiles.

Actor is Roddy McDowall and when updated database appeared as born in 1928

Quoting Winston Smith:

Quote:
And this is exactly why you document it, every time. My first reaction wad there is more than One...really. Not in my memory. But I checked and my memory was right there is only one oddy mcdowall in film history Therefore the by was inserted unnecessarily and must be removed...but you also have to document that... Which is not hard.

What I did now is uploading again deleting the YB.

Quoting quietman1965:

Quote:
the new birth year that appeared

Birth Years are a mess.

Hello again.

Yesterday I updated covers of previoulsy released contributions I made. ( they were accepted).
As I realiced that I did them without any cover , I contributed them yesterday.

I got this answer ·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")"

Movies I updated just covers and got the same answer were (all from previously accepted contributions I made):

Les tricheurs
Ronin
Brazil

Meanwhile I also updated covers of previously accepted contributions I made of

Pack Gran Torino/Million dollar baby--> accepted
The American --> Got a positive answer
Kagemusha--> No answer
Ben Hur--> No answer
Passion of Christ-- No answer
Boccaccio 70-- No answer
Notting Hill&Love Actually: Edición de Amazon-- No answer
Wise blood-- No answer
Kwai river bridge-- No answer
Planet of the apes- No answer

The point is that I dont understand the criteria.

Same yes, some dont and all were previously accepted and released.

To finish with I contributed with 2 movies that are not in database

Passport to Pimilico and I Married a Monster from Outer Space

All features are my own, first one was rejected with above comentary and second one was accepted.
I dont understand why asking for sources if all features are my own as nothing in database.


Please may someone tell me what I am doing wrong?



B rgds
Q

Thx Lithurge
All this could be solved if there were somehow a criteria.
What was valid before should be now because at the end we all here to mantain the db,
not to do work twice.
B rgds
Q

Thx DigitalGhost for your remark.

So when I resend contribution something like

" Covers updated, belonging to my own contribution allready released and accepted" should be ok as remark?

Because this is what it is.

B rgds
Q