A couple merge questions

First question is on digital releases with missing data:
The release 065 (Scorpio) by hoodie x james K (Release group “065 (Scorpio)” by hoodie x james K - MusicBrainz) has 2 nearly identical digital releases. The only difference is that no UPC was listed on Bandcamp. If they were different UPCs I would obviously leave them separate, but this feels more like an oversight. Like they just didn’t submit the UPC for Bandcamp. Would it be better to leave them separate or merge?

Second question is on some very bad vinyl entries:
I had added an entry for Vinyl Me, Please’s release of Enter the Wu-Tang (https://musicbrainz.org/release/c89915b3-d52c-4190-8008-05392a395801) but later on realized that there had been 2 other entries for it (the same editor used that discogs entry as the edit note). But these ones had very poor tracklisting:
https://musicbrainz.org/release/0f35dab7-f118-476a-9da2-202c3ab928df
https://musicbrainz.org/release/3a34115b-6efe-4fcb-958b-b8617f419af7
I marked them as low quality, but wasn’t sure if it made more sense to delete them (the data is bad and has been added more accurately) or merge them (not sure how the tracklisting would be handled.

1 Like

The reason to merge is to keep the older MBIDs alive. They will all be linked to the one release so any external database that references those MBIDs will redirect to the updated release.

A merge will be a bit of a faff with those as you’ll need to do it in a few steps due to needing to split them into two vinyl first. Probably easier to merge the two low quality ones first and then split them.

4 Likes

Thanks. I was afraid of that :sweat_smile: but would rather take the time to do it right.

3 Likes

Good question and I don’t know the answer. The guidelines mention barcodes as possible grounds for keeping separate digital releases, but leave some wiggle room by stating that one must “not automatically assume that no barcode being visible means a new release must be added”.

5 Likes

The way I look at time on a site like this is there is never a rush. Most of the data has been here many years. So a week or two to fix something isn’t long in the overall timescales.

When you start on this, post it here and you’ll get a few votes to help speed some steps up.

3 Likes

It’s important to note that there are no concrete guidelines for this - partly because there are always edge cases, partly because the community isn’t in agreement. So this is all just my personal opinion.

If the only difference is no barcode, I don’t make a new release. But there are some common situations where I make two releases: When one is a self-release, and one is released via a label. Even the slightest of cover variations (except for when deezer does colour changes). When a platform has a release date that’s notably later, and it’s interesting to store this information - for instance when Spotify gets a release 5+ years later, I don’t always feel comfortable retroactively assigning the barcode to a Bandcamp release (keeping in mind that platform release dates are unreliable, so this usually involves some other sources).

And it also depends on how I’m feeling that day :stuck_out_tongue:

One thing though - if someone else has added two releases, and there is any difference, I do not merge. Another editor wanted it separate, and that’s good enough for me.

5 Likes

I definitely get that. I try not to come here after reading certain subreddits because I’m probably just looking for a fight. :sweat_smile:

This is the toughest for me to get over - but I’m getting there. It does appear that the editor is doing this consistently for that reason, so I’ll leave it alone for now.

4 Likes