Niche artist hijacked, but majority of data relates to the popular artist: what to do?

Artist entry Venna (1) was created in 2013 with one release. It laid mostly dormant until 2020, when the page was first “hijacked” to represent another, more popular Venna (2). An entry was created in 2021 for Venna (2), but edits that would be for the Venna (2) entry were directed towards the Venna (1) entry. The entry for Venna (1) now represents Venna (2).

Due to the small trace of Venna (1) and the length of time (4-6 years of data) since the “hijacking”, should there be a new Venna (1) entry created to move the original data to? Or should all the Venna (2) data be moved to the proper entry?

Note

I do not use the word “hijack” in any pejorative sense, as I also mistakenly entered data meant for Venna (2) using the Venna (1) entry.

5 Likes

You can do whichever option is the easiest / disrupts the least. I asked basically the same thing in 2023 - Artist credited to wrong page and was told it’s fine to make a new page for the “hijacked” artist, in this case, a new page for Venna (1)

8 Likes

Usually I would say it’s best to keep original intents for entities, all Venna (2) stuff moved out of Venna (1).

BUT, there are so many Venna (2) stuff that Venna (1) edit history is already poluted and full of Venna (2) edits. Moving many stuff out, would only pollute it twice more.

So in this kind of case, as @afrocat says, I also think it’s better to create a new entity for Venna (1) and move the small amount of existing stuff, there.

11 Likes

I’ve opened edits to move Venna (1) data to its own entry, and pointed the merge of the Venna (2) entries towards the majority entry.

5 Likes

I suggest you also put a disambig on Venna (1) to help guide the next editors who are making a choice.

4 Likes