No, you were clear in your text.
But, in that specific instance, I had information to add which was not included on the jumbled entry.
Data which would make it clear that each person was a separate person.
I get ModBot notifications all the time. Failed dependency - when my edit was based on data that was changed before my edit went through.
what happened in this edit
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/59430357
was: because I added an IPI and an ISNI at the same time that I added disambiguation and a location, it became an open edit.
5 days into my 7 day wait period, this edit
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/59555027
happened, which caused my edit to fail. The 2nd edit didn’t add the IPI or ISNI, which meant the disambiguation and location were added immediately.
We both added the same ‘area’. We both added the same gender. He added a birth place, I did not. He did not add IPI or ISNI. But we did both add disambiguation.
But my entire edit failed because he added information “first”.
So, it then took another 7 days to get the IPI and ISNI added.
2 Likes
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/58542114
I can’t even tell you what happened here, other than the fact that the artist disappeared (probably merged) while my edit waited. So, it isn’t like I could simply go re-add it. I had to hunt down where he went.
Later artist merge edit applied earlier https://musicbrainz.org/edit/58563800
It happens because destructive edits, like merges or removals, are more reviewed, thus more voted, and may apply faster.
FTR, I found out by clicking Raw edit data for this edit in the sidebar to find the related artist then browsed the artist edit history.
1 Like
In an ideal world destructive edits should not pass unreviewed yet they do en masse
(Since recording merges are the most common type see what it looks like when excluding them)
2 Likes
Lots of good responses here so I want to thank everyone that is participating. I still believe that
it is very frustrating to see edits automatically applied that are wrong info, and then have to go in and undo them.
But perhaps making less auto edits isn’t the best solution. Maybe instead, the solution should be towards discouraging or rather, informing users who are about to make an edit.
For example, what if when you are about to create an edit, a list of edits that have changed that specific field you are editing is shown. That way you can see the history of that field and the reasoning behind each change so you can double check your edit before committing it. In addition this same list could be shown if viewing an open edit to give voters an easier time to see why and when changes were made to that specific field.
3 Likes
That’s a great idea!
Wow, it would be so powerful.