That’s fine, but that’s only achievable through relationships, not through ACs. (I’m surprised there isn’t already a page that shows all releases a person appears on as a bandmember – probably a script could do it). If you tried doing this through ACs for Lynne, you’d end up with a page of his two solo albums and the one (so far) ELO album where they went as “Jeff Lynne’s ELO”. The page wouldn’t include anything else from ELO, Travelling Wilburys, The Move, Idle Race, etc. Manfred Mann’s page would be an even bigger catastrophe. Even Paul Simon’s page still wouldn’t list his Simon & Garfunkel work. Tagging would be broken for people who use the “use standardized artist names” option (unless we used 's as a join phrase), searches would break, and there’d be no way to implement the rule consistently. Can you give me an example of how you would write the style guideline that an average editor could read, understand, and follow correctly?
I assume you’re being facetious, but there’s clearly a good chunk of the time where the artist has no control over that. Take a look at the compilations on Peter Green’s page.
Currently there’s only one album credited to Jeff Lynne’s ELO, but imagine he does seven more like that. If a user sees eight albums on Jeff Lynne’s solo profile that aren’t on his solo Discogs, RYM, AMG, Wikipedia, etc. pages, something’s wrong. If I go ahead and link to those profiles (because they should be linked if they represent a significant chunk of what’s shown on his page), those profiles are double-linked and, even though only part of them would be applicable. So either Jeff Lynne’s page wouldn’t contain the relationships necessary to cover the releases on his page, or it would contain duplicated relationships, some of which only partially applied. Somebody like Manfred Mann, or any major jazz figure would have six or seven links to databases for each of the different ensembles they led.
I still haven’t heard any reason why “one band, one link” doesn’t work.