I’m not too good at this myself, but I think leaving an edit note whenever you add a Disc ID should be done, to tell what the source of the Disc ID is. Some releases end up having multiple Disc IDs, and with no edit note, there’s no clear lineage of where said Disc IDs came from.
Edit: Another thing that might be good to add for Disc ID addition edit notes is what client was used to calculate the Disc ID, as some will inevitably have bugs: Disc IDs from Hybrid SACDs - #22 by Freso
Same for “membranophone” → “drums”. While this will likely be correct in 99% of cases, there’s still the 1% where there’s some ambiguity. Knowing your source or arguments/reasoning for why you decided to change the instrument would allow other/future editors to consider whether this edit was in the 1% or not.
I’m pretty sure “pertinent” is too “high brow” for non‐native/fluent English speakers. And I also don’t like that the statement would be wrong. Even with the suggestion of making no-note edits open for 14 days instead of 7, the edit would still move forward (eventually). Let’s not lie or otherwise confuse people more than we already do (– ideally we should confuse less!).
That said, I don’t like the idea of neither checkboxes (one more click for making a mostly simple edit) nor of requiring an edit note for submission. Like others have said, this will almost certainly lead to more bad edit notes than good one. I’d like more contextual nudges and hints and reasons why editors should leave edit notes (for pretty much all edits) close to where edits are being made, ideally also with tips on writing good edit notes (or link to somewhere talking about this).