Artist changed credits for older releases, keep one artist page or make a new one?

It all started when I came across the artist KLOUD while editing the label where they released this single.
I found that in some sites they were credited as KLOUD, while in others they were credited as GEN.KLOUD.
I figured the artist just modified their name at some point, and found a GEN.KLOUD artist page on MB, which I merged.

And now 20 days later, another editor provided more context for this situation:
All releases were originally credited to KLOUD, the artist then decided that everything before a specific release is now credited to GEN.KLOUD. Artist still releases music as KLOUD and plans on releasing more music as GEN.KLOUD in the future.

Now that I have more context, I think the discographies / artist pages should remain separate. I haven’t actually heard the music but from the twitter post and the comments on this instagram post it looks like it’s clearly two different styles of music, newer releases are faster techno, older music was slower midtempo bass stuff.

Would like some more people to weigh in and share their opinion :smiley:

Paging @chaban, @RustyNova, & @reichbc

I wasn’t aware of this! I thought it was only a phase for a specific album. I’m not that into the artist, so I wasn’t up to date. But in retrospect, it is obvious. I like the BLACK album, but couldn’t get into the old stuff because of the style.

I’d say to make the current kloud artist into GEN.KLOOD as the BLACK album is quite recent, then move all the newer releases to a new artist?
Also add an annotation with this info so that it doesn’t happen again


I was planning to make a new GEN.KLOUD page and move all the older releases there, but your way is actually much easier haha.
I want to wait until @reichbc responds because they entered a lot of edits changing artist credits.

Hey, all. Really passionate about this artist and his music, so I just went nuts with it all. Thanks for the feedback.

@afrocat You’re completely right. I managed to miss the part where the artists considering them as separate projects should be considered as separate artists entirely. I figured it would be easier and more organized to keep it as an alias. After this, I’d rather follow the style guide and have someone later merge them if it comes to that.

@RustyNova I like your idea. Easier to create the new “KLOUD” artist and move one release over instead of re-editing all those entries again.

I’ll create the new “KLOUD” artist and move “BLACK” over, since all those releases are already in edit approval stage. I’ll work on the fine-tuning tomorrow afternoon (PST) if someone else hasn’t done it yet.

The old “KLOUD” is renamed and awaiting votes.
The new “KLOUD” is made.
“BLACK” was re-attributed to the new Artist.

I’ll hold off on any further maintenance till some of this comes through, because the site doesn’t show a lot of what was changed.

1 Like

Sending my votes!
But seems that there’s the new 2024 release missing, so it’s fine to only move DARK