| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 5,494 |
| | Posted: | | | | use the Image Insert box..: Quoting nimrod85: Quote:
Resubmitted now.
Would this be also ok ?
http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/2324/unbenanntvty.jpg
Its the DVD Cover scan and the scan from the Digipak page which is extra for the movie | | | In the 60's, People took Acid to make the world Weird. Now the World is weird and People take Prozac to make it Normal.
Terry | | | | Last edited: by widescreenforever |
|
| Registered: October 6, 2008 |  Posts: 1,932 |
| | Posted: | | | | That's what I use locally for that same title, but it is not in accordance with the rules. | | | | Last edited: by CalebAndCo |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Posts: 201 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting widescreenforever: Quote:
use the Image Insert box..:
I havent used it because its so big  and the thumbs dont work here edit:the recent votes http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/6153/unbenannten.png | | | | Last edited: by nimrod85 |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | What you have there is two people openly voting against the rules. I think... if it was me... I would edit my contribution notes to note that the no votes are voting against the rules and the rules state... Rules Quote: Quote:
All voting should be based on support of these Rules.
* If a user is following the Contribution Rules and his/her data is accurate, and the contribution replaces data which is inaccurate or violates these Contribution Rules, a "No" vote is considered an abuse of the voting privilege and should be avoided when possible.
* Conversely, voting "Yes" to a contribution which violates these Contribution Rules should also be avoided.
* Include a reason for any "No" vote that you cast in order to provide useful feedback to the contributor (and the Invelos Reviewers.)
* "Vote stuffing", or voting more than once for (or against) a contribution with more than one account is a serious violation of voting rules. This includes bypassing safeguards to vote for your own contribution. Violations will result in immediate loss of voting ability. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Posts: 201 |
| | Posted: | | | | recent status: reviewing  http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/1793/unbenanntoki.png |
|
| Registered: October 3, 2008 | | Posts: 260 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting andybno1: Quote:
ok submitted a dvd profile stated details where from dvd credits/case and brain and got rejected with the following reason........... what does it mean?
Sources for one or more of the changes and/or additions were not submitted. Please include the sources for your changes in the contribution notes, especially for cast and crew additions. i too had a contribution declined. i also stated info was from actual dvd credits. maybe the holidays and the stress that comes with them are to blame?  |
|
| Registered: October 3, 2008 | | Posts: 260 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Gerri Cole: Quote:
Your contribution was declined because the contribution notes did not contain any sources. Your contribution notes were "forgot to scan dvd cover before submitting originally "
When a contribution comes to the screeners, it only shows the latest set of comments, the whole history of contribution notes do not show cumulatively on the screen.
I previewed your resubmission and it should be fine because it states that you got the listing from the credits of the DVD.
-Gerri for my declined contribution i put this info: new contribution. all cast and crew info comes from actaul dvd in hand. found release date from amazon.com. audio, subtitles, rating, studio, and media company as well as runtime and region code from back cover. thanks when i re-submitted i was more "elaborate" and it was approved right away. |
|
| Registered: March 24, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,044 |
| | Posted: | | | | I too had a new submission declined, and I'm glad that it was for the simple reason.. I goofed. I thought that I had changed the the prerelease cover scan to the proper retail one, but I didn't. So it was rightfully declined.  Rory  | | | DVD Profiler for iOS as of 3/5/2013
DVD Profiler for Android as of 5/17/2013 |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Posts: 201 |
| | Posted: | | | | The 4th day of reviewing, is this normal ? |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,334 |
| | Posted: | | | | That sounds pretty normal | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Posts: 201 |
| | Posted: | | | | I'm just curious;
"Create the profile for the main feature in line with the standard Contribution Rules with the title of the Bonus Feature Film added to the Other Features field. Create a child profile for the "Bonus Feature Film" using the individual UPC if available or use Disc ID (read on a DVD-ROM) if not available. When creating a child profile, do not remove the "Bonus Feature Film" Disc ID from the main profile. "
This should include a 90minutes full feature film(doku) right ?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120801/ IMDB rating 7.1/10
Budget:
$12,000,000 (estimated)
"Battle".. is a distinct (Oscar nominated) doco not a featurette made for a DVD release" | | | | Last edited: by nimrod85 |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 113 |
| | Posted: | | | | Your IMDB link is not the bonus feature on the DVD - it's this film. But yes - I agree with you that this qualifies under the bonus feature rule. | | | | Last edited: by Michael 666 |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | It is NOT a Theatrical film, it was produced by warner and added to this title as a Not a feature film in it's own right and does NOT qualify as a child profile. | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 20, 2007 | Reputation:  | | Posts: 2,851 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting nimrod85: Quote:
I'm just curious Regarding disc features, the Rules state: Quote:
Do not confuse "Bonus Feature Films" with "Any video documentary material regarding the film, or those associated with it." Those are Featurettes. This documentary was an episode of a Tevision documentary series and is about the film Citizen Kane and those who made it or were associated with it. There is no requirement that the documentary be made specifically for the DVD. In your contribution notes you say Quote:
You call a full feature doku "Any video documentary material" =? The answer is "yes". Any is all inclusive, meaning this "documentary material" is included. If The Battle Over Citizen Kane can be considered a "Bonus Feature Film" despite the above statement from the Rules, then we have truly made the rules totally meaningless and useless. At the moment the "Yes" votes outnumber the "No" votes at 20:1. --------------- | | | | Last edited: by scotthm |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | And yet again a case of Yes voters not voting consistently with the Rules and allowing bad data to find it's way into the database | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 113 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Winston Smith: Quote:
It is NOT a Theatrical film, it was produced by warner and added to this title as a Not a feature film in it's own right and does NOT qualify as a child profile. It is a theatrical film - to have been eligible for its' 1995 Oscar nomination the film had to have screened for at least 7 days in a cinema in LA and NY. It also played at many film festivals including Sundance and Berlin. The film was not produced by Warner Home Video - the production co. is The Lennon Documentary Group for PBS. The film was released and broadcast in 1995/1996. The Citizen Kane DVD was released in 2001. The stand alone DVD release of the documentary only was released in 2000 by PBS. |
|