Modbot deleted artist even though the artist is credited on recordings. How come?

Hi all,
I got an email recently telling me an artist was being deleted by modbot “because it was empty: it had no relationships associated with it, nor (if relevant for the type of entity in question) any recordings, releases nor release groups…”. Here’s the edit (edit).
However in the edit history of the release where the artist appears (Kismet) it’s clear that the artist is credited on various recordings.
So was this modbot misbehaving or was it a valid modbot edit? If the latter how do we prevent it happening again?

Looks like the artist credit was changed/removed at some point (further up the edit list). @fmera?

Thanks I missed that bit.

@fmera didn’t leave notes on any of the edits on that release yet somehow has been bestowed auto-edit status. I would have thought edits of such low quality would have precluded such status.


To be fair the edits look reasonably self-explanatory. Kismet is the title of the musical, not an actual artist. It’s just Style / Specific types of releases / Theatre - MusicBrainz being applied.

Maybe let’s read the Style Guidelines before getting annoyed?

Oh I’m not annoyed.

I like quality is all. An attribute of a quality edit is a note, as stipulated in the guidelines. Let’s not encourage unannotated edits by way of self-explanation. We can do better than that.


Yes, agreed. But assuming bad faith isn’t the best approach considering the circumstances.

1 Like

I don’t really get the edits at a glance, so a note would be nice.

But yeah this editor has 500k+ edits and I know what it’s like to be making thousands of simple edits and not want the time to be doubled if you think they’re self explanatory.

Definitely keep an eye on your subscriptions in any case, if you want to protect your work! The voting period is there to help you :ok_hand:


Sure, but none of the edits by @fmera on that release were open to voting. It was only ModBot’s cascading deletion that was brought to my attention via my subscription.

Perhaps the guidelines should make editing notes mandatory if a user insists on not allowing voting. Then silly people like me who look at the edits wouldn’t be non-plussed, creating forum posts, and assuming bad faith apparently.

I would argue that auto-edits that lead to deletions more-so deserve notes as I find trying to discern the history of deleted data quite difficult.


In this case here, however, it’s true that the back cover tracklist shows:

Hal Hackett, Chorus

No Kismet.
Still, the edit note could have told based on back cover (with a link to it). :wink:

For track 1, back cover says Orchestra, but the track artist here is still Kismet Orchestra, which should also be fixed, I guess. :slight_smile:
So as using commas (like on the back cover), rather than &.

1 Like

Of course, sorry.

What I meant is that it would be possible to catch the deletion/edits from your ‘changes to your subscriptions’ email.

It’s not perfect, I miss stuff all the time because I don’t have time to go through them every week, but it can be helpful.

Btw, don’t feel like you have to defend your questioning of the edits, this is really valid feedback and a valid frustration. At the same time @fmera is only human - and has put in their time to contribute to ‘your’ release, which is amazing, even if not perfect.

Also btw, because other users will come across these threads when they have the same questions, a lot of answers (mine included) might have info that’s ‘obvious’ :grin::ok_hand: