Edit Removing Artist Relationship (Information Fidelity vs... Practicality?)

Tags: #<Tag:0x00007fe84bdb13d0> #<Tag:0x00007fe84bdb1308>

While going through my votes, I encountered the following edit ( Edit #80034611 ) by user Misty_Pond. It’s part of a series of edits removing booklet credited artists from the release level of a release because “so the instrumental credits won’t appear on non-soundtrack credits, and will appear on all other releases featuring these recordings.”

The artists having their ARs removed are not getting re-added to recordings. Because the artist is credited in the booklet, even though they are part of an orchestra, I saw that we are losing information fidelity but the editor appears to find it impractical to retain their AR (despite being valid) and there’s no neat way to attach their credit to a particular recording.

In this case (and associated cases), should the relationship remain at release level, since it’s not clear which tracks they performed on? Should it be moved to recording level? Or is editor Misty_Pond correct in asserting that the existing credit should be removed altogether? I’m inclined to vote no, but I would appreciate some thoughts here since it’s an enormous amount of booklet credited artists being removed.

6 Likes

FYI, you need to link the full URL of the edit on Discourse. The syntax we use in edit notes doesn’t work.

Also, for those curious, there are many other edits like this in the pipeline, all made by the same editor.

3 Likes

So if I get this right, the editor is removing these legitimate credits because they don’t like the database loading slowly? Wow. That is mad. Artists and genuine credits are more important than database speed.

It would be even slower if moved to Recording level credits. :smiley:

Get a heap of Nos from me.

@HibiscusKazeneko - your search for other edits is too wide and seems to hook in many other unrelated edits.

2 Likes

Some of the edits did legitimately move release level to recording, although it’s not clear that they ought to be applied to all recordings. There’s something haphazard and inconsistent about the way that the edits to the evangelion OST were made. I hope that this dialog will help Misty_Pond make better, more consistent edits in the future.

3 Likes

This is the point of that “Release Level” credit. It is hard to know which recordings individuals play which instruments on, so we my have somewhere to put Release Wide stuff.

What concerned me is his edit note was implying that he had moved all these people to the separate recordings when he clearly had not. He seems to be replacing individual musicians with the name of an orchestra.

1 Like

Agreed. Here’s a more narrow search for just open edits pertaining to the evangelion OST: https://musicbrainz.org/search/edits?auto_edit_filter=&order=desc&negation=0&combinator=and&conditions.0.field=release&conditions.0.operator=%3D&conditions.0.name=evangelion%3A1.0+you+are+(not)+alone.+original+sound+track&conditions.0.args.0=395488&conditions.1.field=status&conditions.1.operator=%3D&conditions.1.args=1

2 Likes

I have clicked a bulk No on those OST edits as I accessed that list from the Release. Just curious if @HibiscusKazeneko was pointing to other releases that our friend is doing these edits in. Also you should point this thread in that edit note to bring them here to chat. Maybe we are misunderstanding them and they are going to spend time separately editing all the Recordings?

3 Likes

Aha - wow! 4700+ edits in the last 24 hours (Misty_Pond). This is above my grade… get the AEs to pile in and investigate.

Just a quick dip by me into some of those 4700+ edits I see many additions to recordings, so they may be doing as they say and moving data. Just I’d be concerned that it is inaccurate. I have been told before not to move to Recording level details if I was not sure that that musician played on that exact track.

1 Like

At the time I posted that search query link, I wasn’t aware that this editor had any such edits in the pipeline other than those that pertain to the release we’re discussing.

1 Like

I mainly made my comment in case people vote “no” on everything in that list. I have a trust in you that almost had me hitting a no vote on six pages of edits… until I looked closer and just realised that this editor has been REALLY busy in the last 24 hours. :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:

4 Likes

Come to think of it, I almost made that mistake myself :sweat_smile:
I was 2 pages in when I realized that not all of those edits were for the same release. I had to go back and alter my votes on a few of them.

4 Likes

Hahaha - “burn the heritic”… oh, hang on, maybe put that fire out and just burn the edges a bit… :rofl:

Seriously - how do you do 4700+ edits in 24 hours if it is not the devils work? :japanese_ogre:

2 Likes