| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Demisemicenturian 
"Four ever European"
|
 Posted - 12/08/2010 : 17:16:30
|
Many more films with famous actors/actresses have been removed lately, frustratingly. It seems to be on the basis of there being no I.M.D.B. summary, but there is usually at least a review and even if there isn't it is extremely easy to find information on such films.
Even more disappointingly, this very important film (one of a set) has just been removed. Please, please, please can't there be an end to this madness? |
 |
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 12/19/2010 : 01:06:36
|
The I.M.D.B. now classifies these as television episodes.
|
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 12/19/2010 : 05:06:50
|
Why on Earth has this been excluded whilst this is considered valid?
|
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 12/20/2010 : 12:28:33
|
| Oh. Well that was a seasonal loss of votes. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 12/24/2010 : 00:52:36
|
| Benj, please could you at least change the rejection wording from "Not a film" to "Film excluded from F.W.F.R."? No one in their right mind could argue that many of the productions now being removed are not films. |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 12/30/2010 : 18:13:04
|
| This one has now bitten the dust. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 12/30/2010 : 20:41:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
This one has now bitten the dust.
A couple of the reviews can be saved and moved to other adaptations.
I wish the I.M.D.B. would have a simple Production cancelled message on such pages, rather than making it seem like just an error. We know what it means, but it must be linked to from numerous websites and less frequent users may not.
|
|
|
|
TitanPa
"Here four more"
|
Posted - 01/02/2011 : 20:58:59
|
Was that the Alice movie?
|
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/02/2011 : 21:29:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by 1i1anPa
Was that the Alice movie?
Yes. |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
|
|
[matt] 
"Cinemattic."
|
Posted - 01/08/2011 : 04:03:02
|
I've just lost a few more reviews due to films being un-added.
Couldn't the MERPs send us a message before doing this and give us the chance to request for our reviews to be moved (if possible) to another film?
It really sucks losing good reviews and votes when surely they could be moved.
|
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 01/08/2011 : 17:29:19
|
| I agree up to a point [matt] - I really don't enjoy losing good reviews with healthy votes, but there's an argument against moving reviews with votes attached to another film: the votes you gained may not have necessarily been given when attached to the alternative film. I found this when I lost a review with votes in the high teens earlier this year so I resubmitted the review to the closest matching film- it only picked up 2 votes, twice through the fyc and is now back in the ideas bin. I think the vote loss is unavoidable, but you can still resub. Knowing the quality of your reviews you'll get those votes back pretty quickly. |
|
|
|
Demisemicenturian
"Four ever European"
|
Posted - 01/09/2011 : 13:53:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by [matt]
Couldn't the MERPs send us a message before doing this and give us the chance to request for our reviews to be moved (if possible) to another film?
Just to be clear about what's what, I am virtually certain that the MERPs cannot remove films (given that they cannot even remove duplicate reviews), so it would have to be Benj.
Talking of film-removal alerts, though, I long ago requested that accolade creators be alerted, but no joy so far. I am continually finding holes in my accolades. |
|
|
|
[matt]
"Cinemattic."
|
Posted - 01/10/2011 : 01:16:44
|
Yeah I agree with you, demonic. By "if possible", I didn't just mean if MERPs can actually move reviews, I also meant if it's possible for the review to be moved to an alternative film and work in the same way.
There are many which simply won't work for another film, which I wouldn't bother with. But for reviews which can fit perfectly with another film and retain their meaning, it seems a shame to have to resubmit them and lose their votes. Of course, it would have to be judged on a case-by-case basis.
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
I am virtually certain that the MERPs cannot remove films (given that they cannot even remove duplicate reviews), so it would have to be Benj.
Oh right, I didn't know that.
|
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 01/10/2011 : 02:13:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by [matt]
There are many which simply won't work for another film, which I wouldn't bother with. But for reviews which can fit perfectly with another film and retain their meaning, it seems a shame to have to resubmit them and lose their votes. Of course, it would have to be judged on a case-by-case basis.
The way I see it - votes are given to us on a case-by-case basis as well. Once it's moved to another film I think you can't necessarily expect the yield to be identical and passing on a vote previously given in a new context, even if it is practically identical, is in a way a misuse of that person's original vote. I still reckon it's better to take the punch and start over. Unless that particular review has 30 votes or more and then I take back everything I just said... then it's war.  |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Non-films
