Revamped Title Information Page

[Thegoodboy]

Of all the users active in the last 30 days (including sponsors who have had access to the new TIP since June 1st), only 4.09% have switched back to the old version.

and how you define active... anyway

And how many users have left the site since the revamp, (or became less/un-active)?
I lost kumpels after the first redesign and a few more when the old version was gone

Three months later, I still can't accept the new version, which, besides its visual impracticality, also requires more clicks for some operations. I spend less and less time here (which is probably good, so thank you).

Instead of these unpopular rebrands, it would be better if you found a way to automatically (or easily) add new movies so we don't have to do it. I have submitted 392 movies, but my desire to add more has definitely diminished with this design. In the last few months, I saw several unsubmitted movies, and now I've forgotten which ones they were.

Other similar sites seem to have all the movies. I don't know how they do it. Do they rely on collaborative participation? When we submit, can we just add the IMDb link and our score, and that be enough? Whoever wants to update the details can do it later.

[Moribunny]

Instead of these unpopular rebrands, it would be better if you found a way to automatically (or easily) add new movies so we don't have to do it. I have submitted 392 movies, but my desire to add more has definitely diminished with this design. In the last few months, I saw several unsubmitted movies, and now I've forgotten which ones they were.

Other similar sites seem to have all the movies. I don't know how they do it. Do they rely on collaborative participation? When we submit, can we just add the IMDb link and our score, and that be enough? Whoever wants to update the details can do it later.

+1. I have submitted 406 titles to criticker by completing the form. On movielens.org for example, all you need to do to submit a missing title is give the imdb link. It then automatically copies all the relevant info including multiple images and trailers, cast, language etc.

The compact and clever layout of the "legacy" title page was one of criticker's greatest advantages over other sites. Though I suppose it's encouraging to see the new layout slowly and gradually fixing some of its many flaws, it still doesn't measure up to the accessibility and ease of use we used to enjoy. Case in point: the patchy solution of sticking the user's own mini-review at the top of everyone else's, when there used to be a perfect designated place for it.

[Skavau]

Of all the users active in the last 30 days (including sponsors who have had access to the new TIP since June 1st), only 4.09% have switched back to the old version.

and how you define active... anyway

And how many users have left the site since the revamp, (or became less/un-active)?
I lost kumpels after the first redesign and a few more when the old version was gone

Three months later, I still can't accept the new version, which, besides its visual impracticality, also requires more clicks for some operations. I spend less and less time here (which is probably good, so thank you).

Instead of these unpopular rebrands, it would be better if you found a way to automatically (or easily) add new movies so we don't have to do it. I have submitted 392 movies, but my desire to add more has definitely diminished with this design. In the last few months, I saw several unsubmitted movies, and now I've forgotten which ones they were.

Other similar sites seem to have all the movies. I don't know how they do it. Do they rely on collaborative participation? When we submit, can we just add the IMDb link and our score, and that be enough? Whoever wants to update the details can do it later.

Other sites use TMDB to get the data automatically.

The big problem with user-submitted content is the high amount of half-finished entries: missing actors, wrong years, bad pictures, wrong format, poor genres. There needs to be some mods on here who can adjust this stuff themselves. I consider myself fair-minded enough to do that, and I'm sure there are others too.

[Skavau]

Instead of these unpopular rebrands, it would be better if you found a way to automatically (or easily) add new movies so we don't have to do it. I have submitted 392 movies, but my desire to add more has definitely diminished with this design. In the last few months, I saw several unsubmitted movies, and now I've forgotten which ones they were.

Other similar sites seem to have all the movies. I don't know how they do it. Do they rely on collaborative participation? When we submit, can we just add the IMDb link and our score, and that be enough? Whoever wants to update the details can do it later.

+1. I have submitted 406 titles to criticker by completing the form. On movielens.org for example, all you need to do to submit a missing title is give the imdb link. It then automatically copies all the relevant info including multiple images and trailers, cast, language etc.

The compact and clever layout of the "legacy" title page was one of criticker's greatest advantages over other sites. Though I suppose it's encouraging to see the new layout slowly and gradually fixing some of its many flaws, it still doesn't measure up to the accessibility and ease of use we used to enjoy. Case in point: the patchy solution of sticking the user's own mini-review at the top of everyone else's, when there used to be a perfect designated place for it.

Listal has the same system. Copy and paste the IMDB url and it automatically populates the page. I do think Criticker could do with some user-edited content and quirks though to help support its other functions.

I will also add that IMDB does sometimes have dodgy data.