# High data quality requirements **URL:** \ **Category:** MusicBrainz\ **Created:** [February 11, 2018, 7:23pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/high-data-quality-requirements/358880 "2018-02-11T19:23:24Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 3
**Author:** ![spitzwegerich](https://community.metabrainz.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/s/aca169/32.png) [@spitzwegerich](https://community.metabrainz.org/u/spitzwegerich)\ **Post date:** [February 11, 2018, 11:57pm UTC](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/high-data-quality-requirements/358880/3 "2018-02-11T23:57:21Z")
> [@Community Cleanup #4: Hyperion](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/community-cleanup-4-hyperion/356213/36): > > I don’t see full scans necessary if the same or even more data is available via reliable source You never know if that reliable source will still be online tomorrow. > [@Community Cleanup #4: Hyperion](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/community-cleanup-4-hyperion/356213/36): > > Booklet isn’t always the most reliable source (conflicting data & recording dates often have typos). That’s true. Wrong info on the cover art should always be documented in the annotation. > [@Community Cleanup #4: Hyperion](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/community-cleanup-4-hyperion/356213/36): > > Because of potential copyright violations and potential future collaborations with labels I wouldn’t request anyone to store full sets of art (including all the pages of booklet) scanned. Of course, we cannot strictly request that. But still, better have the full art work that not. If some label does not allow them being online … well … then their releases won’t be “high data quality” on musicbrainz. As already mentioned elsewhere, I’m in favor of adding an additional quality level “very high”. Then “high” could be “all available data added” and “very high” should be “all we can dream of” (including full cover art). --- _[View the full topic](https://community.metabrainz.org/t/high-data-quality-requirements/358880)._