IMDb Contributors Help
Upgrades Realized

back to Upgrades in Development


Note: I'm not tracking behind-the-scenes upgrades, so I won't be noting on this page when internal tools are revised, etc.  Nor am I tracking bugs.  This page will only track upgrades outwardly visible to contributors.


Full Episode Support 1.0 Database Expansions - Early Stages of Productions Splitting/Reorganizing Crew Categories
Complete Plot Descriptions Displaying Movie Connection Reasons Integration of Soundtrack Data / Composer Listing



Jan 26 2006:

IMDb Announcement: Full Episode Support has launched! 
From a contributor standpoint, not sure how much more I can say beyond my pre-announcement except, thanks for all the feedback, and your help in populating some of the missing areas that have now opened up will be crucial.

To give you some idea of the scope of this launch, this final build alone has taken about 32 hours and involved about 6-8 very sleep-deprived people. There are now almost 750,000 primary titles -- each episode has its own title. Among the data that needs to be filled in:

- Episode-specific plot summaries
- Episode-specific cast (we have the guest list, but we need to know if the series regulars are in a specific episode)
- Existing unmigrated episode-specific data (quotes, any crew members that failed to auto-match, etc.)
- Episode-specific connections (movie references, etc.)

Again, thanks for all your support on this, and have fun. We've got a few data issues that will take another day or two to sort out (for example, some ep-specific soundtrack data will be moving tomorrow), and I'm sure it's going to take a couple months to get some idea of where things are going, but I'm happy and excited to get this out the door for everyone to see.

Jan 19 2006:

Q: Paul Thomas Anderson's page indicates that he was born in 1970, and directed an episode of Saturday Night Live in 1975. Is that correct?
A: [I]n full episode support, this will sort into the appropriate place in his filmography (2000) and the series title appears with no year; under it, is "Episode #25.13 (2000)" -- so maybe we'll stop getting this kind of question.

Jan 19-23 2006:
Follow-up Q&As to the Announcement

Q: Loose series?
A: It won't happen immediately on launch. I'm not clear yet whether it's something we'll do ourselves once the title list has been updated, or if it's something we need help with -- I'm guessing it will be a mixture, where we deal with some of the most prominent cases (like the ones I mentioned, and Tatort, and Intimate Portrait, and maybe a few others), and we rely on contributors for the rest. But I haven't confirmed that yet.

Q: Including episode details when submitting a new title?
A: Good question. Don't know the answer yet - I'll check and get back to you. As I said, there are still some bugs in this area, so I can't determine the answer experimentally.

Q: Will the email submission system work?
A: Yes - bearing in mind the new title format using braces, of course. And some new functions, like cast/crew migration, are best handled with the online interface ("best" both because it's much simpler for you, and because our processing of it is much simpler).

Q: Will we be able to restrict searches to Main titles only vs including Episode titles?
A: Ultimately, yes. However, we're waiting until after launch to add episode titles to the search index - not sure if it's coming shortly after launch, or if it will wait until V2.

Q: Will "People Working Together" search work for episodes now?
A: Ooh, good question. I'd guess so, but unfortunately, that's another thing that's missing/broken in the testbed.

Q: Complete guest list?
A: Not at the moment, though we may add it. There are still some formatting issues being hammered out.... Requests noted.

Q: "Regular guest" split on main TV show page?
A: It's not on the test site, but I don't know yet if that was intentional or an oversight.... The distinction between cast and guest will go away. Eventually, it will go away completely; for the interim, the regular cast will be listed separately until it's been migrated to episode-specifics. I would expect that once that's done, we'll see something like "regular guests" come back to the series overview pages.

Q: Guest ordering?
A: Yup, once this change is made, the guest list will actually be folded into the cast list, so everything works like it does there - you can supply order numbers, gender changes will actually matter for people with only guest credits, etc. Not immediately clear how order numbers interact with the series regulars -- whether guest credits should begin at 1, or at {regular-count}+1, or what. I'll try to get that clarified. At the moment, you can't get both lists at once when you try to do an update - you can either "correct/delete" the guest list as if it were a cast list, or you can "Episode migrate" the series regulars, but EM doesn't let you set order numbers, and you can't do both at once (the way that you can correct+add today).

Q: WGA-supplied writer credits?
A: We haven't talked to the WGA about episodic credits yet, but it's certainly a possibility. (We had no good way to handle them before, so didn't ask for them.)

Q: Separately-listed pilots (i.e. TV movie/special) moved under show umbrella?
A: Pilots will only be converted automatically if they are already listed as episodes.

Jan 19 2006:
IMDb Announcement: Full Episode Support details

"Well, "pre-announcement" might be more accurate, but the internal beta test is nearing completion, so I can finally describe what the implementation looks like.

First, you're probably wondering, when will this launch? The answer is, soon. We've currently got 13 open bugs. Before we launch, we need to either fix them or decide that they can wait until after launch. (In fact, by writing this message I'll partially clear one of those bugs.) We're evaluating readiness several times a week.

"OK, now, what does it look like? The first thing you'll probably notice is that /name pages include specific episodes listed under TV series appearances instead of having a separate "guest" section. The episodes are listed there by title -- the "episode title" is the title if available; if not, then the season/number; if not, then the date. (If there are more than a few episodes, you'll see a summary or partial list instead of the entire list with a link to the full list.)

"If you go to a series, you'll see more subtle changes: The "guest appearances" link has been replaced by a link that will either say "episodes" or "series data", and there's a line showing a list of seasons in the text area (under the plot outline) with a "more" link at the end; all these links go to the same place, with the season numbers going to anchors within that page.

"When you visit that page, you'll see a list of episodes, each of which includes a link. Those links take you to new title pages -- yes, we've created a new title page for each of the 250,000 or so episodes we listed. This page will also include a lot more episode-specific data, like plot summaries, as it becomes available, but of course there isn't much of that yet.

"An episode title page looks a lot like the current title pages, with a few additions. First, there's navigation at the top of the page to step through all the episodes for the series. There's a link back to the series main page. What you'll probably notice most, though, is that the cast list is broken into two groups: "Episode credited cast" and "Series cast." The first list is the existing guest list; the second list shows all the cast regulars from the time frame of that episode (thus, for example, if you look at a first-season episode from "24" you won't see Kim Raver on the list).

"There's also a special link at the beginning of the "series cast" list: "Were they in this episode?" If you click on that, you'll get a special update page listing all the regular cast members, with "yes" and "no" boxes you can check to answer the question. These updates ("Episode migrate") have a special processing path that allows us to handle them more efficiently, so should not add significantly to the burden of our list managers. (This sort of thing can also be done from the name page, but I think the mechanism there is too complicated, and I don't really recommend it unless you're feeling adventurous -- though it can be useful for a series regular.)

"A note about title formats: Internally, the episode title is in braces following the series. Thus, "Friends" (1994) {The One with the Monkey (#1.9)} or "Tonight Show with Jay Leno, The" (1992) {(1 August 1995)} (exact date format subject to change). You won't see this on the main display page, only on some of the update pages; on the main display page, it's formatted a bit more neatly (details depend on whether you're using Pro or not).

"One of the open bugs I mentioned is to finish converting data, but the idea is that goofs, soundtracks, quotes, and other data tagged with specific episodes should appear under those episodes in addition to the cast and crew data (I haven't said much about crew, but it works a lot like cast -- for example, for a title like "X Files, The" (1993) where we have detailed writing credits, you'll see ep specific credits).

"Because episodes are now full-fledged titles, they can accept a lot of new kinds of data -- things like plot summaries, keywords, "movie" connections, URLs, release dates, etc. can all be applied to specific episodes (this means that some kinds of previously forbidden connections can now be applied -- for example, you can now start sending all those movie references in The Simpsons to their relevant episodes). In some cases, notably keywords, the series-level list will be inherited by all the episodes. There may be cases where this exposes some episode-specific keywords that had been at the series level; you should delete those at the series level and re-apply them to the affected episodes (one example we've used is "klingon" for the various Star Trek series).

"There's one place where episodes won't be treated quite the same, though: Message boards will still be at the series level, in order to keep a critical mass of discussion.

"As always, we'll need your help and support to make these changes as useful as possible. Once this launches, the main places we'll need data are: cast/crew migration (as described above), episode-specific plot summaries, and episode-specific title connections. Other episode-specific data, like soundtracks and keywords, would be nice, particularly for a soundtrack-driven show, but generally would be second priority. I should mention that for crew migration, the automatic process exposed a number of misspelled titles; these crew credits remain at the series level, and we'll need your help migrating them to the proper episodes. For example, if you look at the crew credits today for "X Files, The", you'll see several people credited for episode "Signs and Wonders", but the real title is "Signs & Wonders." (Please wait until full episode support launches to fix these.)

"New episodes will be created using the new title form, but will be much simpler than creating full-fledged new titles, and won't have the burden of proof for a completely new title. Again, there will be a special, more efficient processing path, and updates more than once a week. (A couple of the open bugs are around this area, so I can't walk through all the specifics just yet.)

"Also, after launch, we plan to finally clean up some "loose series" like all those Columbo movies, or the hundreds of A&E Biography / E! True Hollywood Story titles, and connect them once again as series.

"Remember that this is the first phase of a work in progress, and we expect to add a number of enhancements and refinements over the next few months. For example, episode-specific voting still needs a bit more work, so it won't be in the first phase (but it's a top priority). We're keeping the changes deliberately subtle until there's a lot more episode-specific data present. I'm interested in your feedback about what I've outlined here, or questions about anything that was unclear or omitted above. Because we are still working on bugs, some of the details above might change (particularly specific text), but the broad outline should be much as I've described."

Jan 1 2006:

"Finally, part of the reason for the delay to other projects above is because full episode support is now well on the way to launch. The team have been working hard over the last several months to prepare the way for a massive expansion in our TV data coverage. The groundwork is all complete and a working version of the new system is currently undergoing an internal beta test ready for launch in January/February 2006. This is a huge project and involves creating title pages for every episode of every TV show in the database. We will be able to list cast, crew, plot, trivia and any data on a per episode basis as well as store generic information and summaries at the main series level. We are very excited about launching this in 2006 and know that most of you will enjoy the added depth of coverage in the TV area (and hopefully help us complete the missing information)."

Dec 21 2005:

Q: Perhaps covered elsewhere, but I've noticed that when adding a New Name via a TV Guest Appearance, there is no checkbox for Actor or Actress.
A: When full episode support comes around, guest appearances will start looking a lot more like actor/actress credits.

Dec 21 2005:

Q: Hope you will be able to see bouth a full cast list for the entire series and a seperate title. And to rate and comment on each episode.
A: Yes, those features will be present. Each episode will be a title, with all that implies (voting, commenting, etc), though there will also be "inheritance" (for the programmers among you) - in other words, some data from the series level will also be visible at the episode level, and maybe vice versa.

Dec 11 2005:
Q: It is possible to search for a person's name in various sections such as Actor, Actress, Crew, All proferssions. However the Actors and Actresses categories do not find Guest appearances. It would be very useful if guests were searchable, either as part of the Actors/Actresses section or else as a separate category in their own right.
A: The handling of guest entries will change with the impending launch of full episode support. It's not worth the trouble to make a change to searching before that.

Dec 11 2005:
Q: I had thought information about which segment an actor is in in an anthology movie goes in the attribute field.
A: And yes, as far as I can see, the segment entry goes into the character field. Perhaps this will change with full episode support, perhaps not - I'm not sure whether multi-segment movies are addressed in the first phase.

Dec 9 2005:
"Trivia (among other things) will get converted over to specific episodes as needed as part of the FES implementation - I'm told about 50% of all such episode-specific data is converting cleanly at the moment. So go ahead and submit. Format it something like:

In episode #1.23, "Episode Name", this interesting thing happened.

Dec 8 2005:

"I'd be very mad at the people involved if we don't have full episode support within 3 months. In fact, it's starting to look like one factor in the timing of its launch will be the holidays - we don't want to launch something that could potentially cause significant breakage just as our staff is leaving for a week or two."

Oct 26 2005:

"Yup, guest and acting credits should all be treated as a single category for this purpose. Guess what? That's something full episode support will do. It's coming soon enough (I've been told) that fixing this in the current system isn't a good use of our developer's time. There are some other glitches in the way guest credits are handled with the current additions system; for example, name splits can't deal with "guest" as a category.

Oct 5 2005:
"I will note that there's more movement on this project lately than I've seen in a long time, including at least some internal mockups.

Feb 10 2005:

"I'm told there was recently significant progress in designing FES, though I don't yet know details, and I'm not sure how many I could reveal at this time even if I did. But thank you for realizing this will be a massive undertaking. I know there has been some talk in the past of perhaps displaying episode credits in two groups on an episode title page, those associated with the series and those specific to the episode. I would expect to see extensions of what's currently done with the "regular guests" to more areas as well on series title pages, but that's just my own personal guess."
Oct 14 2004:

Q: When IMDb finally gets full episode complaince... will you use data that has been lingering within the system, or will the info have to be re-submitted?
A: there *is* a great deal of "lingering" episode data, in addition to what's visible in the crew and guest lists; this data will definitely be used to populate the episodes when full support launches.

June 24 2004:

"Full episode support has recently moved to the top of the priority list for a couple of our people. Expect it sooner rather than later. As usual, though, it will be ready when it is ready, and not before, so I'm not going to give you a date."

May 3 2004 and here:

Q: A TV movie - which was really an episode of a TV series - was recently deleted from the database. Why, where did it go, etc?
Q: I submitted a new title that is really an episode of a TV series. Where did the submission go?

A: (I)t was converted to an episode.... However, when that happens, the cast and crew don't automatically map over to episode data; that probably won't happen automatically until we have full episode support (at which time, a lot of this data that's been hanging around should magically reappear).
A: When we get full episode support, all the data should magically reappear. However, if you really want to see it sooner, go ahead and add it under the series title.

Feb 10 2004:

"I would expect it to be possible to order the (guest) cast for each episode, though I wouldn't expect that to allow interleaving the guests with the regulars."

Feb 9 2004:

Q: I think we are all operating under the belief that movie connections to/from specific episodes will be possible at that point.
A: Yes, and there will be other possibilities, like episode-specific plot summaries. I would guess there will be a series-wide plot summary explaining the characters/premise ("The Ricardos and Mertzes are wacky friends in a New York City apartment building"), along with the episode-specific ones ("Lucy gets a job in a chocolate factory and can't keep up with the assembly line").

Feb 5 2004:

Q: Will 'full episode support' allow the acceptance of titles that have NO guest appearances?
A: Absolutely. You can't add such a title today because there's nowhere to put it. The other details are still being worked out.

Feb 4 2004:

Q: How long until we see full episode support?
A: "The relatively short term should be less than six months, but no promises."

Jan 23 2004:

Q: Ten (+1) IMDb Wishes for the New Year... 5. That IMDb "stand up" and finally make some sort of ruling on what constitues a "main cast" credit as opposed to a "guest appearance" credit on a TV series. There are some good guidelines, but confusion remains. Again, the suggestion (from someone else, NOT me) that appearing AS THE SAME CHARACTER in 20% of a season's or a year's episodes constitutes "main cast" listing seems to most aptly reflect the truth and to be most appropriate worldwide.

6. That IMDb decide on the correct way to include aka's for TV episodes and on the correct way for notating TV episodes that not only have the same title as another episode in the series, but may even be a new production of a previously broadcast script.
A:[O]ther changes in the works (general episode handling) may make #5 and #6 less of an issue or even solve them completely."
Apr 9 2003:

"We definitely need to deal with what, for lack of a better term, I'll call "loose series"; Columbo, with 70+ entries, is one, but there are several others (notably the Tatort series from Germany with over 500 entries, but also the E! True Hollywood Story, with almost 100, and Intimate Portrait with over 150). Again, details are fuzzy, and this is something we'll keep in mind as we work them out."

Apr 8 2003:

"We're still working out details, but the episode title will be an extra piece to the series title. One syntax we've used internally (this may not be what we end up doing) is: "Series" (yyyy) {Episode (yyyy)} There will be some provisions for data applying to an entire series, as well as data applying to specific episode(s). Thus, for example, the language/country will generally apply to the whole series, as will the creator and regular cast members (there will also be provision for episode ranges), while the directors and writers will generally be attached to specific episodes.

Again, I want to emphasize that the details are still sketchy."

Jan 22 2003:

"there is a major change in the works, probably coming some time this year, to the way we handle episodes. The details aren't final, but at least in some senses, episodes will be handled like individual titles. I would expect there will also be some kind of support for year ranges, but again, the details aren't nailed down yet.



Jan 24 2006:

Kevmo:  [P]rojects in such early stages of development have generally not been eligable for inclusion in the main IMDb at all. So nothing has been lost here. The titles you're talking about which are only on IMDbPro never would have been allowed on IMDb.

And the reasons they're not allowed on IMDb remain as valid as they ever were. Maybe even more so, given the ever increasing submissions workload. Read the general eligability guide. I'd imagine by restricting updates on these tentative titles to IMDbPro subscribers only they can keep a lot of the noise out. 
A: Thanks, Kevmo has summarised the situation perfectly.

I'll also add that titles which are in the very early stages of development yet are major releases (and therefore eligible for the main IMDb site) are still present here.

Jan 17 2006:

Q: At one point as recently as two weeks ago, the 'Orbit' page was located on regualr IMDb but was moved to Pro. I am clearly interested in making as much information available to the non-IMDbPro users as possible (although I do love IMDbPro myself). Is there some critical information I need to submit to make it available on regular IMDb as opposed to only Pro?
Q: The Development Status on the regular IMDb only allows for Production Unknown, Announced, Pre-Production, Filming, Post-Production, Completed, and Released.  I don't know if this is new, but the the Development Status on Pro has all the above plus Pitch, Optioned Property, Treatment/Outline, Script, Turnaround, and Development Unknown. It seems that if the production status is one of these the title can only be seen on Pro. I would guess this means that if a title has one of these statuses only someone with Pro can see it and change its status to one viewable on the regular site.

A: New feature for Pro users only, and listed only on Pro: The rules for in-production titles are different. In addition to those new statuses, the rules for acceptance are a bit looser -- but the followup process is tighter. Every few months (sorry, forgot exact number), you'll need to either update the status of an in-production title or it will be deleted, and once it's completed, it needs to meet our normal inclusion rules.

Now that it's launched, I'll see about getting some of the relevant guides clarified a bit.

Jan 1 2006:

"Other items of note in 2005...the launch of a much-requested "in development" category for IMDb pro to enable better tracking of more speculative projects at earlier stages of their making.

Feb 24 2005:

"Given the number of people who would like to see projects at even earlier stages (optioned books - I just answered one of these in today's messages - or spec scripts), if anything, we are likely to start tracking projects earlier in their lifecycle, not later. However, if we do start with such early-stage projects, we'll definitely create some new status codes to handle them, and we are looking at possibly adding more status codes within our current guidelines."



May 9 2006:

"Breaking up the misc list is indeed on our list of upcoming projects. One major prerequisite was changing over the way we managed credits internally; that work has been completed in the last few months."


Jan 1 2006:

"The filmography credits are the last major area to be moved completely to the new processing software, the first filmography sections moved just before the holiday and the remaining ones will move over in the January 2006 timeframe....This will also finally allow the long-promised more flexible organisation of credit categories on the site itself. As mentioned in my message last year, we were intending to spin off more departments from the miscellaneous crew section in 2005, however, we decided to wait until the new procesing system was complete rather than duplicating the effort twice. 

Dec 8 2005:

"Some of the infrastructure changes we've been making behind the scenes should indeed make incremental list updates much easier. Most filmography lists are almost ready to change over to the technology we use to manage the guest list; a few already have.

It's my understanding that one side benefit of this change is that it will make splitting off more departments from the misc. list much easier, though nothing specific is scheduled at this time.

Apr 21 2005:

Q: Does anybody know why imdb has not created seperate crew section credits for the lighting department (gaffer, best boy electric, electricians)?
A: This may end up as part of the camera department when we split that off, rather than a separate lighting department.
A: At the moment, we're working on some changes to the way we manage lists internally. Until those changes are done, we're not going to split any more lists off - the way they'll get split and managed will change too much for that to be practical. Once the changes are done, list splitting should become much easier, and we'll also be able to manage lists in a more flexible and dynamic way (e.g., having one person deal with TV series acting credits and another deal with film acting credits - not that this particular division of labor is planned, it's just an example). We'll also be able to improve the way we do error checking, which we hope will reduce turnaround times for at least some data. A number of lists have already migrated to this system (notably new titles, trivia/goofs/quotes, and biographies), but the basic filmography data has not yet.

These changes are near the top of the priority list, and we expect to complete them this year.

Mar 9 2005:

"There are two major things that need to happen first.

We have some software changes we are working on that will allow us to manage lists internally in much more flexible ways, including exactly how they are split. This is at least months away from being done, but it's on this year's task list. (Not a guarantee it will happen this year, but certainly a goal.)

The other thing is that we are adding two more list managers; they have been hired, but are still some weeks away from their start dates, and it will of course take them a bit of time to come fully up to speed. Until they are on board, we probably won't be able to make any major changes that will affect workloads.

Rest assured, this is something we really want to happen - the keeper of the misc. list is currently overwhelmed by the volume (in part because that's not his only duty), and anything that reduces his workload, like splitting some off to other people, is good."

Feb 10 2005:

"A music department, along with a camera department (to name another popular one), is definitely something we intend to do. However, creating any new list is a non-trivial process; besides a number of software changes, we also need to identify and move credits from (usually) the misc. list to that list, write the necessary submission guide, and identify a list manager, to name a few. My notes from the last time we did this (over 4 years ago) identify 28 steps in 4 phases involving 7 or more people; while many things have changed since then, and the specific sequence will certainly be different, there's no reason to expect it to be any simpler."
Oct 22 2004:

"It's still quite common to have a "makeup/hair department head", and in any case, it was certainly common in the past. The credits are too closely intertwined for it to make sense to separate the departments."

Jun 24/28 2004:

"There certainly is a "production office" (or something like that) category needed, which would include PAs (set and office), accountants, assistant to directors, etc. That's probably where the various production staff not under DGA/PGA control would end up as well. Maybe even first aid, studio teachers, and craft services.... I should note that the lists were not completely consistent on the way things were split, so we can never expect to correspond exactly to all such lists (the lists I examined included 3 major motion pictures, one semi-indie, and a broadcast network TV series, so a good cross-section of larger budget titles). Of course, since these lists focus on the production phase, many pre-production and post-production jobs aren't even present.

When we split off departments, we need to balance what makes sense to an insider (who is probably used to thinking of video folks as part of the sound department) and what makes sense to an outsider."

June 23 2004:

"the camera department is one of the departments we plan to split at some point."

June 21 2004:

"At some point in the future, a separate costume department will be broken out from the "other crew" list."

Jan 23 2004:

Q: "Ten (+1) IMDb Wishes for the New Year... 7. That "Associates" be listed with the people with whom they are "associated" rather than being relegated to a misunderstood, catch-all category like Miscellaneous or Art. Yes, Virginia, Associate Art Directors and Set Decorators ARE nominated and win Oscars, as, occasionally, are Supervising Editors, etc.) All categories should include "Associate" or "Supervising" (like Producers does, for example), while, understandably, not include "Assistant"."
A: "We are looking into something along the lines of #7, but no promises yet"


Jun 24 2005:

Q: sometime a few months ago I asked whether I/we could submit complete and detailed synopses (properly headed with spoiler warnings, of course) for older films which most people have either already seen, already read about in detail, or aren't likely to seek out (or, in some cases, find anymore). And you said you would check with the Synopsis guy about this.
What have you found out?
A: I remember you asking. He didn't respond, but while this might be a nice feature, it's currently not on the list of things we want to add.


Feb 23 2007:

"we've just launched basic support for the display of the movie connection explanations."

Feb 10 2006:

"Displaying that information is on the list of near-term planned enhancements."


Feb 7 2006:

"... like with movie connection reasons (though at least displaying them is a scheduled enhancement, and longtime contributors know how to see them today)."

May 20 2004:

"Eventually, the link explanations will become generally visible."


Mar 22 2006:

"Yes, a major revamp of the composers section is planned. Much as the acting filmographies were getting overrun with "self" credits, the composer filmographies are getting overrun with this kind of thing, as well as song credits that don't belong there."


Feb 9 2006:

"The composer section is slated for an overhaul this year (primarily to properly integrate the soundtrack section)."


Jan 1 2006:

"We also plan to sort-out the confusion caused by soundtrack credits being split over several sections of the site in 2006."

Feb 3-17 2005:

"At some point, the soundtrack list entries will appear under the filmographies of the people involved. If you add credits from the soundtrack to the composer/misc lists before that time, you will be adding to the workload of our list managers, both now and for the future time when we actually implement this change."

"I would guess soundtrack entries will be differentiated in some way. Can't say in detail, as I don't think the feature's been designed that far yet."

"Our planned change is to the filmography listing on the name page, not the conposer listing on a title page."

Jan 25 2005:

"Eventually, there should be entries of some sort (possibly set aside from "normal" composer entries) created automatically from the soundtrack list. Until that happens, we are somewhat grudgingly accepting pop song composers (but not performers) in the composer filmography list."
April 12 2004:

"At some point, all credits that are currently buried in the soundtrack listings will be listed on the filmography pages of the people involved, automatically, through planned software changes on our side. Therefore, we ask you not to duplicate those credits in filmography sections, unless they appeared that way in the film's credits."

back to Upgrades in Development