You are the only one thinking the other way 
There is a community here who follows guidelines and accepted ways. We work together.
What we don’t have are bullet prove legal rules covering every possibility. No legal team has checked the guidelines. So there are holes. Please accept this. Please accept that your need to blindly copy a shop credit is not the common way here.
That’s just not true. Re-read the first line of the first post of this topic.
Sorry. Correction - in a minority.
(Re-read the first line and can’t see anything different. Sorry. First line is literally a 5 to 3 majority of not agreeing with this ETI argument…)
You have not provided a single style guidance on which to base your argument, and you are simply trying to push the argument by the numbers. That is not a good way to conduct a discussion. Minority opinions are ignored by the majority of veterans, which does not seem to be a healthy community.
This is about relationships. We are assigning a relationship to each recording. For these reasons, we add live information to the disambiguation only in the case of live recordings, not in the title.
In other words, the structure of displaying even live dates and venues is a story that applies to recordings, not a rationale for not assigning an ETI to the track title.
You already got your response in the sixth post from the Style Leader.
Extra title information for live release - #6 by reosarevok
You can’t get better style guidance than from the person in charge of style.
It’s a live album so it doesn’t make sense to repeat live version on each track.
See the physical edition back tracklist, it certainly does not show live version on each track:
It’s something that eShops do, probably because they don’t have a disambiguation comment that would be needed to be able to show these recordings as live on their own page (outside the release page).
You can, actually you should, use the recording disambiguation comment to store live info, and relationships.
You can make recording comments visible in release pages if you use the INLINE STUFF userscript.
I think this feature should be added to MBS, without requiring a userscript, BTW.
There are now three threads on this same edit:
