On my above post, I would really appreciate thoughts and ideas on how to add the release. My initiative will just continue to get more complex, so all input is being recorded by me as reference.
I will post others as I dig them out. I know ahead of time that input will be desired.
This is the file names for the above release, I can also post the metadata, but that is not so easy to do. I want to show what is in front of me so others can better understand.
I use the filtering a lot, but not on many multi-choice options. There are only so many combos than can be created. For example, try finding when Discog URLs have been added - no filter option that I can see for URLs.
Maybe I’ll try and build a mega filter of some form that drops all the Recording Relationships. I haven’t been brave enough to try making an “everything except for this stuff” filter before. What I would love to see is “show me edits unique to this Release”. Currently Edit histories seem to be “Show me this Release, and Recordings, and Works”. A little too wide.
Sorry - not got a clue on that one. Just looks too weird for me. Is that just a DJ Mix?
AhHA!! Thanks. I did wonder if it was just language catching me out. You have now save me from CTRL+F Searchs on 15 pages. Something that gets a bit mad if going through a dozen Releases in the same Release Group as it is loads of scrolling past the same data…
I did also recall that there may be a few tickets ripening on this topic.
Haha - you got me for a moment when I looked at MBS-11374. I thought out scripture saviour @jesus2099 had come to our aid with this but then realised that was just his TODO list.
I don’t mind multi selects, just would be nice to save commonly used ones.
I have been sparked to go try this later when I get some spare time.
Infy-scroll. I DO like the sound of that one. 
What else is fast broadband for?
I had a quick poke at trying to find how to drop works and recordings from the list, but “Add Relationship” is the big one there and it applies to all. (i.e. a Copyright will be on a Recording and a Release. Ditto an Instrument)
I’ll start a thread on “search tricks” later as don’t want to take this one OT and currently busy with daft phone calls…
Infy Scroll is based on Autopage-something that includes some MB settings, so I suppose it works. 
The second one, apparently Greasy Fork is down, at the moment.
What’s your secret readme?
Yes, well, I guess it’s secret. 
LOL! I hear you. No, it is not just a DJ-mix though. Each track is a separate recording. The release is not a continuous play from start to finish. Each track also does have the Start and finish, if you know what I mean. They are clearly separate.
EDIT: I would by happy to share the release with you, on a private basis if you are interested. This is so you can first hand listen to the work and better discern.
@jesus2099 has a few scripts which I feel should be a part of MB by default. I understand that some users may not want such things, but I suggest they be included as an option, like the “Display Credits at Bottom”, you can opt to display or not in this case.
I suggest this for very technical reasons. User scripts open a security hole in the browser, and also opens the door for other random anomalies. I believe that @jesus2099 does great work and I do not question his work, but the fact remains that we are modifying the behaviour between server and client.
This is the next one I am looking at, for adding to the MB database:
These recordings are not at all original, and in this case, it is continuous although there are clear track markers. Thoughts on how to handle this release?
Again, I have these releases, so I can do all that is possible.
I still don’t really know. I think it is a case of name all the tracks with slashes. There is no neat way.
So one TRACK is For the Love of Money \ Do It Any Way You Wanna \ TSOP (The Sound Of Philadelphia) etc and the Artists is O’Jays \ People’s Choice \ MSFB \ etc.
And I really don’t need that much Osmonds and Bay City Rollers anywhere near my audio system.
I was nervous of scripts initially, but know how much more they bring to the show. They bring the interface alive and add so much that is still lost in a ticket somewhere. Most of the scripts are restricted to only the MB website, but as an IT Security Guy they do make me nervous.
If that new Pink release is all covers, then you will end up with lots of Unknown artists and links to the Works. This kind of realise is messy for MB as some editors will want to strip that original artist from the title and leave you with just: Title: Telefone (Long Distance Love Affair) \ Artist “Unknown” \ linked to the original work.
I am stepping out of this one - I can already see the argument coming over the hill between the Purists “just the title \ link to the work” and the “what it says on the cover” brigade. Not my area of music at all.
LOL! I have the “honor” of having no opinion of the music I have. My “hates” are Elvis and country. Yet… I have a 12.1GB store of 60 CDs in FLAC.
This is why I ask before editing. This is a strange area, and I know that each person likely has their own opinion. I am happy to add these, but I would prefer to have some direction. Not my direction, but the consensus of all, especially the more senior editors.
Sometimes it is worth putting one example up in place, then post it into the Voting/Auto-editor Request Thread - #1040 by sammyrayy thread and ask people to tear it apart. That thread gets lots of eyes on an edit.
I am trying to remember where I have seen some examples of cover music like that. This is why I think it can cut both ways… Last time I added one there were only track names and none of the original artists were listed on the cover.
it looks to me like these are actually continuous DJ mix releases, just with the tracks split. an example of this is my copy of Trance Party, Volume One.
in all honesty, I don’t add that many DJ mixes myself, I’m just kinda winging it… the one thing I do know is to add disambiguations to the recordings, that way they don’t get merged with the original mixes on accident. an example is Sandstorm. I wouldn’t mind doing that a couple times, as I’ve got a nice userscript that makes it easy~ 
(it’s “Set recording comments for a release”, btw)
Yes, absolutely. I see this error a lot.
I am simply presenting to the team here some items that have not been added by me for various reasons, most of which it seems people here understand.
I would like to suggest that such things be easy for users to find. Yes, i did make a page of my own, but there is no need to use mine. There are a lot of tools I have recently learned of that would be nice to have in a central location for users to find and use.
That is nice, I did not know of this. Ideally, I would like each and every edit I make looked at. Not by an auto-editor, but someone that can add a set of eyes.
I would like to see this also in a consolidated reference for users.
Post stuff in there that is unusual or challenging. Where the rules are not clear. Posting everything will get overkill. It is not really a Tutorial thread, more a “I can’t make sense of this guideline” thread.
Just post in the forum in general. Like these threads - asking for help to make sense of the guidelines gets responses. Also you don’t have to get it right first time. I have some releases I will add I know will take a month to settle in as I make corrections to what is initially posted.
I don’t really have the time to fully “subscribe” to your edits, but I’ll happily look when asked. Have a poke around when I’m free. When you overlap my subscribed list I am always paying attention to that area as I know a bit more about the subjects in those cases.
There are threads around on the Scripts, but they get buried and out of date. I know I have my favourites I can’t do without - but that is a conversation another time.
Unfortunately voting on edits often feels like “work”, adding stuff is fun!
The people who subscribe and check a lot of edits are worth their weight in gold <3
See if you can raise your vote count to match your edit count 
It’s interesting to note that other sites have this problem too. RYM, Discogs, they have the same problem with getting eyes on edits. Sometimes much worse!
Yes, I understand that there is no way all of my edits could be reviewed. For me, it is more that I like the extra eyes. I have tried voting on edits, and have doe some, but it is difficult at times to find edits I have knowledge in, vs ones I would need to research myself to vote properly.
I think having edits reviewed/voted/etc is a critical part of the process. There are some sites, Wikipedia for example, that allow users to make the edits, and when the powers that be see an issue, they simply revert your edit or change things, and you are left wondering what was wrong, how to improve, etc. I like the process here, in that each edit can have as much detail as people add. Not just the initial edit, but also reasons for voting no, etc… vs just getting your edit reverted.
This is my problem too. I look at pages and pages of edits every day to check them, but that does not mean much voting. Often many of those are auto edits. I only like to really look at artists I understand as I have no knowledge in so many areas.
I agree that the slow 7 day editing process here is great. I’ve learnt a lot this way and now pass that on to noobies when I see them making those same mistakes.
Almost impossible - unless I started spam voting stuff based on username. Which is wrong in my eyes. After comparing your user stats I think I am happy enough with my ten to one ration of votes to edits in the years I have been editing. 
Our stats are comically similar.
Yes, this is exactly what I am trying to do, resulting in difficulty getting edits to vote on. I am figuring out the system a bit better now though.
