Error Listings and rejected edits 2021

[62gaming]

A while back my submission for the following item was corrected to not having the [FR] tag on the basis that it did not have the red warning present:
https://vgcollect.com/item/190018

While it's taken me a bit to get around to it, I scanned the box at archive.org to show the side which contains the warning so I've resubmitted the title:
https://ia801502.us.archive.org/12/items/megaman-battle-network-euu-box/2.5%20Box%20Back%20Scan.jpg

[dhaabi]

A while back my submission for the following item was corrected to not having the [FR] tag on the basis that it did not have the red warning present:
https://vgcollect.com/item/190018

Thanks for the clarification and effort put in toward explaining. Your edits have been approved.

[skifreeslut89]

Hi! Slowly trying get to grips with the formatting rules while adding my Switch collection to the database here (sorry to whoever moderates my edits, for all the rejected ones, I hope they'll improve going forward  ).

One particular rejection I do not agree with. It was to the following entry: https://vgcollect.com/item/187561 and the notification said that the info I supplied was incorrect. But I don't think it is.

Cross referencing the barcode, it matches my boxed version, as does the item number. The boxed version contains the same box of pins that the North American "Day-one Edition" does, but in Europe it was just sold under the name "Double Pack", which again is what the database entry mentioned seems to refer to.

The game case within the box has a separate barcode (5056280422884) and has different artwork on the cover than the box (a lot more similar to the Japanese non-double pack release).

The EAN can be seen in this listing, proving that it refers to the box with game and merch: https://www.proshop.se/Spel/Robotics-Notes-Double-Pack-Collector-Edition-Nintendo-Switch-Aeventyr/2884385

In the above listing you can also see the cover of the game case that I am refering to.

I can take some pictures of my own copy to prove it if needed, but my camera is too potato to produce database-worthy images.

[tripredacus]

Unless I misread what you posted, you don't say what you tried to change that got rejected.

This entry: https://vgcollect.com/item/187561
matches this physical release: https://ebay.com/itm/114978541119
Has green triangle.

While there is no entry for this release: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/115000852682
which would seem to be [ES][FR], despite being sold in Italy it has no SIAE label.
Has purple triangle.

There is no entry for the game case from inside of the purple triangle box.
I cannot find a picture of the case from inside the green triangle box.
There is no entry for the RubberRoad pin box in Swag category.

In regards to your proshop.se link, we cannot use an EAN from a website like that as being proof of anything. Too often a website will use wrong region EAN (especially for EU website or website that imports EU items) or will use a pre-release/invalid EAN or an EAN that was never used on an actual item. So for proving EAN usage it always has to be photo proof.

Hi! Slowly trying get to grips with the formatting rules while adding my Switch collection to the database here (sorry to whoever moderates my edits, for all the rejected ones, I hope they'll improve going forward  ).

One particular rejection I do not agree with. It was to the following entry: https://vgcollect.com/item/187561 and the notification said that the info I supplied was incorrect. But I don't think it is.

Cross referencing the barcode, it matches my boxed version, as does the item number. The boxed version contains the same box of pins that the North American "Day-one Edition" does, but in Europe it was just sold under the name "Double Pack", which again is what the database entry mentioned seems to refer to.

The game case within the box has a separate barcode (5056280422884) and has different artwork on the cover than the box (a lot more similar to the Japanese non-double pack release).

The EAN can be seen in this listing, proving that it refers to the box with game and merch: https://www.proshop.se/Spel/Robotics-Notes-Double-Pack-Collector-Edition-Nintendo-Switch-Aeventyr/2884385

In the above listing you can also see the cover of the game case that I am refering to.

I can take some pictures of my own copy to prove it if needed, but my camera is too potato to produce database-worthy images.

[dhaabi]

One particular rejection I do not agree with. It was to the following entry: https://vgcollect.com/item/187561 and the notification said that the info I supplied was incorrect. But I don't think it is.

I handled your latest edits. Concerning 187561, I knew beforehand that the Day One Edition had released in North America and rejected your Description edit submission not fully knowing if the same item had also released in Europe, as I couldn't find any listings for it online. If you submit the information again, it can be approved, since we know that only the standard Double Pack released in Europe.

[wizgecko]

Say, I was wondering why my edit to this cover of Wind Waker HD was rejected: https://vgcollect.com/item/99252
The one currently up doesn't look to be very high quality, and while my edit wasn't of the greatest quality either, I thought it still looked sharper than the one currently up, for the lack of a better term.

Your edit was rejected due to the proposed artwork being incorrect—not due to its quality. The artwork you proposed is for an item already within the database located here.

Right, but I could swear the version I posted didn't have that three-colored circular "stamp" in the corner that says "U.A.E., Sauda Arabia, Malaysia, Singapore Official Product".

[sworddude]

I'd like to know how these 3 (4) pictures get rejected compared to the unrecognizable ones that we currently have for this listing


https://vgcollect.com/item/110305

Also it's a steel case it's not a cardboard box how are people going to recognize it if you only show it partly from the front this make no sense to me not to mention a pretty damaged example aswell i don't see why we can't show a nice example as a whole  this is way better than the current picture. not to mention the form factor we can't treat it the same way as a regular boxed game even with a nice example cut out it would be unrecognizable. it's in a different shape compared to a cardboard box and it's rounded



Also I don't see how content pics are denied wich is definitely nice for these kinda items




I finally also don't see how this picture of cardridge is worse than the discolored version we have atm




What are the reasons behind rejecting these perfectly fine images especially compared to what we have atm. I don't see any water marks
I don't really see a reason how especially the first picture is denied.

[dhaabi]

For all matters related to why submitted edits were previously rejected, please post here.

Also it's a steel case it's not a cardboard box

Also I don't see how content pics are denied wich is definitely nice for these kinda items

In the Description field, it is detailed how this item is a tin box while also noting what contents are included with this release. Presently, nowhere in the entry does it state that this item is contained in cardboard packaging. In the Item Images post of the Advanced Style Guide, you can find the rule regarding how images should be treated for the cart slot.

Cart art slot for physical Games, Consoles and Accessories
The third art slot, refered to as "cart-art" or cart/disc/item, must be of game or item iteself and not include additional items in the picture. For example, an add-on for a console should not also show the console. A game should show the cart, disk or disc image and not additional packaging. If there are multiple discs, they can be present. Discs should not be shown in the case, but on their own. Image quality rules prevail, we will allow a low quality image if being used as proof of existance.

I finally also don't see how this picture of cardridge is worse than the discolored version we have atm

In the same post of the Advanced Style Guide, you can also find this general rule that applies to all submitted images:

General image rules
Should be cropped to the edges of the focus of the picture

All four of your submitted images are poorer quality when compared to the images that currently represent this entry, while none of them accurately depict the back of this item, as you repeatedly submitted images to occupy this slot erroneously.

I don't see any water marks

Your submissions were not rejected due to watermarks being present.

[sworddude]

All four of your submitted images are poorer quality when compared to the images that currently represent this entry

The back I understand, no contents pics allowed was a bit different some time ago. but the first picture is definitely the front and a way better image I'd say.

Highest Image quality in that case is quite a questionable rule to me considering the image quality differences are very hard to spot when they get cropped to a tiny image on the site. if they retained their original size sure, but If I'm not mistaken you don't have acces to that when you look at the database.

Interesting system, it is what it is I guess.

[wolff242]

What a rude response. No wonder so many things are missing on here.

[tripredacus]

All four of your submitted images are poorer quality when compared to the images that currently represent this entry

The back I understand, no contents pics allowed was a bit different some time ago. but the first picture is definitely the front and a way better image I'd say.

Highest Image quality in that case is quite a questionable rule to me considering the image quality differences are very hard to spot when they get cropped to a tiny image on the site. if they retained their original size sure, but If I'm not mistaken you don't have acces to that when you look at the database.

Interesting system, it is what it is I guess.

Cart art always was to be the cart of disc on a game entry. This is from the original Style Guide that was put into the forum. While there may have been a period of time where people were putting "content pictures" in cart art on game entries, they were doing it on their own volition.

If the picture you put here is of the item you own, then it would be a better pic for front because it doesn't have the rust in the current pic. But the replacement picture should be formatted or angled in the same way. IDK if you can find a good way to take a pic of the lid from straight above without getting a reflection on it, or if it is possible to scan that part.

[dhaabi]

I was able to find a better photo of the packaging with minimal glare that I would like to believe satisfies everyone and have updated the image art.

[sworddude]

looks good, nice improvement indeed

[nathan776]

Just looking for a clarification on Barcodes for EU games since I'm slowly going through what I have.
Since items without TLD's in the EU category are presumed to be UK releases, I'm unsure why my edit was rejected.

https://vgcollect.com/item/173471
My edit: 5051892202657
Rejected for: 5051892202893

[dhaabi]

Just looking for a clarification on Barcodes for EU games since I'm slowly going through what I have.
Since items without TLD's in the EU category are presumed to be UK releases, I'm unsure why my edit was rejected.

https://vgcollect.com/item/173471
My edit: 5051892202657
Rejected for: 5051892202893

There are two UK versions for this item. However, this entry's back image—which is original to the entry's submission—features the barcode ending in 2893. That is why your submission was rejected. I wasn't able to discern any differences from the two items aside from barcode information, but the spine for each item may differ from another, as well as what content is found inside the packaging.

5051892202657
5051892202893