I’m utterly perplexed by the rules for “Legal” and “Performance” names.
I created the Artist “Prince Niles Rodgers” as an artist to be used for writing credits for works. ISWC credits as “Prince Niles Rodgers” and thus should be documented as so.
IPI 00045620792 is "Prince Niles Rodgers"
IPI 00052210040 exist for “Prince”.
As a writing credit the artist should not be merged. If a work is documented as legal name, use it. If is a performance name, use it. In this case both are “legal” names.
In the style notes it is stated “Alternative names, including any legal names and name variations, should generally be entered as aliases”. This makes sense for artists but makes no sense for writing credits for works which are an absolute to ISWC.
There are some cases where 2 IPI artist are used, but the majority are singular.
T-072.246.935-3 Niles Rodgers Prince only.
T-070.925.470-5 Niles Rodgers Prince & Prince in 2 results.
MCMANUS DECLAN MARTIN 00466293429
COSTELLO ELVIS 00035801301
At the moment musicbrainz shows this correctly, until someone decides to merge this also. Writing credits under Elvis Costello should not be “aliased” as Declan McManus, which is the case at the moment.
I can understand having a statement of “generally” allows for flexibility but at the moment it is far too flexible. Allowing for “Bob” for “Roberts” makes sense but totally stripping names or using totally incorrect information does not. Using aliases also break the composer sort fields. The rules are too open in this case and lead to inconsistent data.