Usually there is decline reasons under the contribution in your list. there would be no need to click on anything to see the decline reason. Only thing is you do not always get a reason for declines. They do have some reasons listed in the system so all they have to do is check off which reason. But there is still cases where those reasons would not fit... so we don't get a reason for the oddball ones at this time.

What title/UPC was declined?

In the last 18 months i've gotten only one explicit reason for a decline.  (I could usually figure it out because of the No vote comments.)

Once or twice when i had no No votes but was declined and i couldn't figure out why i sent a note asking about.  Sometimes it's a mistake.  Sometimes screeners see things voters didn't.

Quoting tweeter:

Quote:
What title/UPC was declined?

In the last 18 months i've gotten only one explicit reason for a decline.  (I could usually figure it out because of the No vote comments.)

Once or twice when i had no No votes but was declined and i couldn't figure out why i sent a note asking about.  Sometimes it's a mistake.  Sometimes screeners see things voters didn't.

Kung Fu Panda
Edition: Pandamonium Double DVD Pack: Widescreen
097361-397849
Submitted Nov 12, 2008
Votes: Yes: 9  No: 1
Nov 15, 2008:  Profile Declined; Images Approved

My submission changes it to a boxset with no film-specific information, so the two titles would be added as children.  No cast or crew.  Runtime total of two titles.  NR.  2008 US.  Edition from overwrap (link provided) to distinguish from single releases. DreamWorks Home Entertainment.  Animation, Martial Arts, Comedy.

I retained Keep Case, because it's two keep cases; once they're unwrapped they have no physical connection.  Maybe I should have termed the cellophane as a Slip Case.  But seriously, should I have changed it to blank or Custom?

Should I have taken "Widescreen" off the Edition?

The only No voter didn't understand the rule about boxset rating, so that's not the reason.

It's very frustrating after spending four hours or so working on this to have it summarily declined. (I suspect a word or two would have made it perfectly clear.)

I would not enter it as a boxset.

The reason I entered it as a boxset is that the two-pack had its own UPC, whereas the component discs had a different UPC and no UPC, respectively.  Entering it by the UPC of the individual disc would preclude entering that disc separately in the future in the (likely) event that DreamWorks sells it without the other disc.

Quote:
The term "Box Set" is used to define any release that includes more than one film.

(emphasis added)

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
Cable:

! No, It is not a popularity contest, if that 1 NO vote was a legitimate reason for some error that was made by yu thatn is all that is needed. Do not get in the habit of ignoring No votes. If there is a No vote and their is problem that should be fixed, then fix it and resubmit.This is about building a database that is as coerrect as we can make it, not about popularity.

I agree with Hal, I would not call Kung Fu Panda a Boxset either, I would call it two independent films, the second from what I have seen would be entered by Disc ID.

Skip

(My screen name is Caleb... not Cable.)

(And please can the high-and-mighty attitude when I am asking for help.)

I did not ignore the No votes (nor the rules); in fact, I reformatted the entire submission based upon the No votes I had received previously.  Did you read my post in which I detailed what the No vote was?

The solo KFP DVD is entered in the database by its UPC.  The other title is entered in the database by its Disc ID.  They are sold together under another UPC.

But what I say doesn't matter.  I quoted the rules, so lets look at the case:

1) The two films being sold under a unique UPC is a release.

2) It contains more than one film.

QED

Before I worked on it, the Double DVD Pack UPC had been submitted as a single profile, but I believe looking at it as a boxset is closer to the facts and supported by the rules.  The discs are individually packaged and submittable as stand-alone profiles.

And to respond to your second post:  This clearly is not a "lets throw two movies together and sell them for $10 to get this inventory off our hands" deal; it is a bonafide release of a new feature film and a new companion film.  Your point about there being nothing connecting them is well taken (I made the same point myself), but I believe the boxset approach is valid and so did all the voters on the profile.

If Invelos disagrees, of course, their ruling overrides.  However, I am not sure that is the case as no explanation was given.

EDIT:  Please note that the rules do not say that a boxset must have unified packaging.

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
We understand the reason you might have entered it as a boxset, but the packaging for this pair of films is fairly common and used often by retailers to help clear shelves. Once you take off the shrink wrap there is nothing binding the two packages together, they are simply two separate packages.

Skip

I agree with Skip here. Maybe the rule is written a little inconveniently for this issue. But if they do not remain a boxset when you unwrap it I can not see it being a boxset.

Even though you are literally right on the rule as it is written. I personally would never make a boxset profile for a piece of cellophane... And if one did get in this way I would never use it and would just have the 2 separate profiles in my database.

I am thinking maybe there needs to be a clarification in the rules though... because in my opinion the last thing we need is a load of profiles that is no more then the UPC of cellophane wrap.

The rules do not say that a boxset must have unified packaging.

Your personal preference would be to list the discs separately, and that's perfectly valid.  I was going to do it that way until I rethought it a bit.  Having the overwrap UPC entered as a boxset gives the user the freedom to enter the discs separately if that is their preference.

But personal preference (yours nor mine) do not control profile submissions.  The rules control as interpreted by Invelos.

Quoting Addicted2DVD:

Quote:
Yes.. I realize that... Why do you think I said you were literally right to do so. I just said I question that is what was meant by this rule. So I brought it up in the rules committee forum to find out. and to get it fixed if it is not what is meant by this rule.

That would be very helpful.  Thanks.

I'd like to enquire about the reason for the decline, but I can't see how to do that.  Elsewhere it was stated that a direct PM wouldn't be the best way to contact the powers-that-be, but that a Contact Us link message should be used.  But none of the choices given seems to correspond.  What should I do?