ETI in disambiguation

Tags: #<Tag:0x00007f9d009e07b0> #<Tag:0x00007f9d009e0698> #<Tag:0x00007f9d009e05d0> #<Tag:0x00007f9d009e0508> #<Tag:0x00007f9d009e0440>

On Edit #79769356 a discussion was started about the use of the disambiguation. I moved “remix” from the recording and put this in the disambiguation. No said user ulugabi this belongs to the title.

It isn’t clear to me if this belongs in the title or the disambiguation. And as we found out, the documentation is a bit vague about this.

In this case “remix” is written on the case.

My point is I did a lot of these edits and never got any comment about this, reverting the edits is a lot of work and being a little OCD about this I can’t sleep :slight_smile:

Can you help to straighten this out?



Not long ago I have written this little summary as a reusable edit note:

[ETI] / Extra title information (= official, written on the cover artwork):

Additional information on a release or track name that is ‘’‘not’’’ part of its main title, but intended to distinguish it from different releases or tracks with the same main title (such as version/remix names or live recording info), should be entered in parentheses after the main title.

[Disambiguation_Comment] (= free text):

to help distinguish identically named artists, labels and other entities.

should be written in English if possible and kept fairly short.

So my understanding is that in the context of recording names, the ETI should stay if it is commonly used in (printed) tracklists and should only be moved to disambiguation if the title is mostly used without the ETI, e.g. the information that something is a radio edit only appears in the detailed credits inside the booklet (exception: live ETI becomes redundant in the presence of a live disambiguation).


Please paste the full links in the forum.

If most tracks have this version information printed on the physical tracklist, then I think it’s good to have it also on the recording title.

Recording title should reflect the most common track title, it should even be automatic.

The recording disambiguation comment can contain the version info, when most tracklist don’t include it but you know it’s this version.


There should also be an extra field for ETI to better distinguish between version info and anything that’s not but still uses parentheses:

This would also improve compatibility to the rest of the music industry which already has a field for version info

1 Like

I do consider the disambiguation comment as a version info field, already.
When do we need 2 fields? The ticket doesn’t say.

That would be so awesome! And since it’s based on most common track name, makes total sense.

1 Like