By chance I stumbled upon this release:
Are the missing tracknumbers a bug or is this a feature? 
It is very well possible (track numbers are free form), but in this case it looks wrong: https://www.discogs.com/Arj-Snoek-Albert-Gabriel/release/27302
This is an indication too, right?
Well, they are different tracks, but that doesn’t mean they have the usual numbers. Every track has a position, as you can clearly see from the track list (and the Disc ID). But for some reason the original editor just didn’t fill in the numbers in the column “#” in the release editor, so they all show up as blank. The images on Discogs do show that there should be numbers.
2 Likes
Don’t think I have seen an argument for No numbers as artist intent before. In this case they are on the rear cover so I guess the editor had a copy\pasta error. CDs by their nature have a fixed order.
Just been editing the release to add some credits (@jesus2099 has already added the track numbers in). And that Release brings up a different interesting puzzle. Is that Album Arj Snoek by Albert Gabriel or Albert Gabriel by Arj Snoek? He performs as Arj Snoek, but credits his work to Albert Gabriel (his real name)
So what is actually written on that cover? 
The puzzle to me is who I credit as “performer”? Arj or Albert?
2 Likes
I think, except the release title, artist and track artist, the relationships are pretty clearly printed in discogs scans. 
The rest of the credits are clear. I agree. Just interesting the way he has named the album in that circular manner. It could be read in either direction.
1 Like
Yes without an official site presenting the album, we cannot really guess.