I don't think it has anything to do with the rules themselves. As with all of the rules on the site, the end decision usually depends on which particular mod notices your edits. While most of them are quite lenient, treating the editing guidelines for what they really are - guidelines, and tending to value their time and not interfere with user edits, unless it is something obviously bogus or directly violating the rules, there are a few mods who see the rules as black-and-white and take it upon themselves to interfere with everything they don't like, applying the rules by the principle "forbid anything that is not explicitly allowed," and considering themselves sole possessors of ultimate truth. Sometimes ignoring the same rules they are supposed to keep just because no one can hold them accountable. Just cope with that, you probably won't have any meaningful response to any question regarding the fuzziness of the rules.

I should add, most of the edits I've seen (removing archive footage/extras) have NOT been by a mod - they've been by random other TMDB users. This is why I specifically want a mod to answer!

If the option is up to a random editor who is a purist who believes only credited actors should be mentioned, then suddenly Bess Flowers, who currently has 715 movie credits, may go down to virtually 0 credits, as most of her roles were uncredited. If the option is up to someone like me, who enjoys movie trivia, then John Magaro's comments on his time working with Spielberg on Munich are worth crediting here. On IMDB I've found quite a few actors who only work as extras, and I think their uncredited work is worth celebrating - what if someone disagrees and their credits are immediately removed by someone who just happens to disagree? Of course there is fuzziness, but in the end, either a mod should clarify, or you or I re-add archive/extras, another editor remove, we add, they remove, and the carousel goes round and round and round until one of us gives up. This seems impractical, unhelpful, and detrimental to the site.

As I say, the TMDB bible seems to suggest archive footage is not only correct but encouraged, and thus these examples (amongst others) SHOULD be included. However, it took less than a week for another TMDB editor to remove Bernstein from TAR - this seems to meet the 'archive footage' criteria in the TMDB bible, but seemed not to meet the tastes of this TMDB editor. It also took just over a week for Magaro to be removed from Munich, where his role is something he's expressed pride in often recently. In both cases, these deletions were not done by a mod - merely another editor like you or I. And if we're just going to spend ages on TMDB editing the same pages, what's the point?

As such, I think it would be helpful to have some specificity here.

@pinkmoon1234 said:

I should add, most of the edits I've seen (removing archive footage/extras) have NOT been by a mod - they've been by random other TMDB users. This is why I specifically want a mod to answer!

Three examples I've seen removed recently include:

• Bob Dylan from I'm Not There (a movie which ends with archive footage of him on stage)
• Leonard Bernstein from TAR (where a crucial scene involves Cate Blanchett watching a video of Bernstein)
• Tippi Hedren from Birdemic (in which they watch her from Julie and Jack, and for which she is in the credits)

As a matter of fact, these three, as well as Magaro from Munich, were removed by the same mod.

Oh, my mistake, I didn't see it was a mod. Nevertheless, like I say, it'd be nice to have an explanation from them, rather than merely assume guidelines can be interpreted differently over and over. For example, the Tippi Hedren Birdemic credit (for which she is third billed in the actual credits) surely meets the criteria:

(archive footage) should be appended for footage previously filmed for a different production. Archive footage include any footage not directly shot for a documentary. It can take the form of old footage of a person that is no longer alive, or any other person the filmmakers didn't get to interview directly for the documentary. The attribute is also used when a clip from a movie is used in a different movie.

That's exactly the case here (indeed, she's credited as "Ms Tippi Hedren: Footage from Julie and Jack"). If the rules seem to specifically state that her inclusion is OK (if not encouraged), why was she removed? The fact that it was a mod actually makes this more confusing to me.

Meanwhile, regarding 'uncredited' work, the bible states:

(uncredited) credits should only be added for persons with a proper cast and/or crew credit in the database already. An exception can be made for actors with confirmed (uncredited) appearances in movies made before 1950 (when very few actors got proper credits). Make sure to check original sources to confirm such acting credits before adding.

(uncredited) credits for recent content should not be copied from IMDb. Please try to find a trustworthy source confirming they are in the final cut of the film or episode. For old movies, IMDb can be trusted to a higher degree.

This one seems more up for debate. There's a difference between an uncredited cameo by a superstar, or some one who worked as a background actor before becoming famous. However, what's the difference between, for example, Magaro's extra work in Munich (something he's mentioned recently in several interviews), or Megan Fox's credit as "Stars-and-Stripes Bikini Kid Dancing Under Waterfall (uncredited)" in Bad Boys II (something I believe people only know through the moviemakers talking in interviews)? It strikes me that either both are legitimate (both are examples where a later-famous person had earlier uncredited background work), or both are illegitimate (if early extra work doesn't count).

After all, TMDB rules are not guidelines; they're a bible! And whilst there are times where I wish there was more clarity (I've discussed my feeling that the rule on animal actors is far too vague), this time the bible seems very clear. Since there may be a misinterpretation or a change in the rules I'm unaware of, it would be nice to have one of the mods who looks at these clarify whether such footage is meant to be included (as the TMDB bible implies) or whether there's a reason to delete archive credits instead.

Yeah, it's a bible all right :) But as it says in the opening statement, its content is just broadly outlined guidelines: "contributions that don't follow the guidelines outlined broadly in the bible will be removed."

On a serious note, I agree with you. I think the reason to remove such credits should be only when they are added by mistake (or blindly copied from IMDb), and the person didn't appear in any quality at all.

It seems to me that it is one particular mod who considers it their personal crusade to systematically go through entries and delete all credits with the (archive footage) attribute for no obvious reason. Could be seen here for example. Either they are not aware of the rules or prefer to ignore them, ruling mostly by a matter of personal preferences.

However, what's the difference between, for example, Magaro's extra work in Munich (something he's mentioned recently in several interviews), or Megan Fox's credit as "Stars-and-Stripes Bikini Kid Dancing Under Waterfall (uncredited)" in Bad Boys II (something I believe people only know through the moviemakers talking in interviews)?

One thing I don't think you have said is whether they actually appear is the movie. Based on the guidelines you copied above, to add an uncredited credit you first have to confirm they appear in the final cut of the film. Not everyone who works on a movie end up on the screen.

@banana_girl said: One thing I don't think you have said is whether they actually appear is the movie. Based on the guidelines you copied above, to add an uncredited credit you first have to confirm they appear in the final cut of the film. Not everyone who works on a movie end up on the screen.

That's fair - obviously actors who don't make the cut don't get a credit. Like I say, in borderline cases, perhaps it could be up to the editor to provide reason?

In this case, Magaro is verifiably in the movie. There's an interview here: https://deadline.com/2024/11/september-5-john-magaro-interview-1236174294/

DEADLINE: What scene were you in? MAGARO: It’s when Eric Bana is walking across the street in New York. I’m this skinny little boy, fresh off the boat into New York, walking across the street from him.

So, I saw Munich again. It’s very different, and I really want to hammer it into everyone’s heads that September 5 is not Munich for so many reasons. Munich is something totally different.

Admittedly it's been a long time since I've seen Munich, and I'm not sure I'd recognise John Magaro from 20 years ago on sight - but I think this is a sign he was in that movie.

Is this something to perhaps put on the discussion page of those individual movies? Or is that something to discuss with the specific mod? If 'uncredited' roles are valid, but need proof, that makes sense, so I guess just sticking to the specific movie's discussion page is right in the future?

On a similar note, do you know if the archive footage point in the TMDB bible is hard-and-fast, or just the whims of whoever edits? I seem to think those rules are fairly logical, but I've seen archive footage deleted for various reasons (certain politicians which I understand / certain examples like Hedren in Birdemic who's in the credits / someone like Russell Crowe in Gladiator II who's in flashback) and all those seem to follow the TMDB bible, but are deleted/re-added at random. It'd be helpful to have some clarity!

@banana_girl said:

One thing I don't think you have said is whether they actually appear is the movie. Based on the guidelines you copied above, to add an uncredited credit you first have to confirm they appear in the final cut of the film. Not everyone who works on a movie end up on the screen.

This begs a counter-question: can the person who removed his credit confirm that he didn't appear? Because all uncredited archive footage people removed from here did appear in the episode (the episode starts with a scene taken directly from the Avengers: Endgame movie), but they were removed anyway, by the same person. This makes me think that they don't do any checkups, and remove the archive credits simply because they don't like them. I was going to rewatch Munich before seeing the new September 5 film, so I'll try to spot Mangaro. But I'm sure he wouldn't lie about being in the film if he didn't.

On a similar note, do you know if the archive footage point in the TMDB bible is hard-and-fast, or just the whims of whoever edits?

I've asked internally to clarify the rules on uncredited archive footage especially. I think we first need some answers to be able to correctly advise you both on how to proceed in the future.