Merging work: Edit #125206902 - MusicBrainz
Replacing incorrect artist link: Edit #125209091 - MusicBrainz | Edit #125209092 - MusicBrainz | Edit #125209122 - MusicBrainz
Moving ruby text: Open Edits for 天外魔境－自来也おぼろ変－映像的電子蓄音盤 - MusicBrainz
If people are feeling benevolent
https://musicbrainz.org/release/e2a2bee7-70ba-47c0-ae7f-32494b2acdc6/open_edits
Hello all - would love opinions on these edits: a user changed classification from “Album” to include Compilation + Live, when they don’t apply.
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/125454339
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/125454298
many thanks for having a look!
1 Like
Splitting artist names into character and artist where applicable
https://musicbrainz.org/release/626befb6-aa4e-4300-8415-a9aea26e954f/open_edits
Misapplied “Soundtrack” work classification
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/125555304
Artist correction
https://musicbrainz.org/release/d31f7c1a-d36d-46e8-b896-73e0885ac6f5/open_edits
I’d like to request votes and perspectives on the following edit:
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/125702457
This edit preserves “(Live Version)” as Extra Title Information (ETI) because it is explicitly included in the official release title on streaming platforms (Spotify, Apple Music, etc.). In my view, this aligns with MusicBrainz’s purpose to reflect releases as they are, based on real-world data.
I understand there’s a convention that says if the same ETI appears on all tracks, it may be removed to avoid redundancy. However, I believe this logic introduces inconsistency:
- If the same ETI appears on some tracks, it’s retained.
- But if it appears on all, it’s discarded — despite being part of the release title.
This creates a contradiction and makes ETI handling appear subjective.
I’ve tried to engage in discussion, but unfortunately the other editor seems to dismiss my concerns and insists I simply don’t understand, rather than addressing the points directly. I’m concerned this will result in the edit being rejected without fair dialogue.
To avoid this turning into a one-sided decision based on custom rather than discussion or clear guideline, I would really appreciate more community input and votes.
Thank you.
1 Like
It would be wonderful if anyone could vote for these edits:
https://musicbrainz.org/release/609c5aaa-3cd2-41ba-ad5d-db46ec09892c/open_edits
Correcting classifications for BGM works / Open Edits for 金色のガッシュベル!! オリジナルサウンドトラック - MusicBrainz
1 Like
I have made edits to correct artist confusion.
https://musicbrainz.org/artist/6584323f-cbeb-48ec-b1fd-e7842f6a15a4/open_edits
Corrections to artist credits will be made after these edits are approved.
Got a few mistakes I made when copying work codes:
Edit #126049653 - MusicBrainz | Edit #126049887 - MusicBrainz
Edit #126093164 - MusicBrainz | Edit #126093166 - MusicBrainz
Edit #126093380 - MusicBrainz | Edit #126093382 - MusicBrainz
As well as a few artist-related corrections:
Edit #126096454 - MusicBrainz | Edit #126096455 - MusicBrainz
Hi guys and again, may i ask for some votes?
https://musicbrainz.org/release/7c2602cb-d3b5-40f1-803a-2a85e105eb3c/open_edits
Hiya all, please have a look at this edit merging dupe releases of an album
Please vote for this edit. I entered the credits given in the CD booklet without remembering that this an instrumental:
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/126617075
Though I attempted to rectify it within minutes, the system requires the 7-day wait. Your votes would be appreciated.
Edit: Thank you, all! The waiting game should be shortened.
Changing to material actually present on print:
Data move / Edit #126822092 - MusicBrainz
is it possible to speed up acceptance for this edits (sorry i made it twice but I did not notice that it worked the first time):
https://musicbrainz.org/user/tritigr/edits/open
https://musicbrainz.org/release/238fb13e-5453-4fe4-baae-066fcff016a2
I want to attach the CD TOCs which does not seem to work for “digital media”.
1 Like
Hello!
I’d suggest to, instead, add a new version of the release to the same release group for the CD version instead, since there does seem to be a digital version too.
Often the bar code will be different on digital and physical versions, for instance, so it’s helpful to split them separately.
3 Likes
Would be good to get some input on this edit, related to an earlier discussion about how to handle ETI on digital release titles. Totally understand the edit based on how the style guide is written, but doesn’t correspond to the outcome of that discussion, so there’s a risk of it going back and forth.
1 Like
Can you vote for this edits:
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/126933182
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/126933321
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/126936324
Hi all,
kindly vote for these edits. I was too late in locating the co-artists and adding them to the recordings (it’s a brand-new release, came out a few hours ago):
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/126992247
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/126992248
Proof can be found here:
Steel Guitar on Slow Dance to Goodbye: Paul Franklin
Fiddle on Southern Synchronicity: Stuart Duncan
Thanks!
Edit: thanks for verifying and approving, @jesus2099! 
1 Like
Hi all,
please vote for the following edits, as the original entries were made by mistake (batch-add relationships). If only MusicBrainz featured a 1-minute window to revert erroneous edits… 
I have listened to the track, and can confirm there is no bass guitar or drums — just an acoustic guitar and some occasional, faint keyboards:
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/127018159
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/127018160
Of course, if they can be approved, that would be better! 
1 Like
Thanks to all who voted for edits #127018159 and #127018160 in the previous post.
Now that there are enough Yes votes for both edits, is it possible for an auto-editor to approve them? The only reason I request this is because it’s misinformation that should be rectified, and that carries some degree of urgency (compared to other edits such as adding album art, which can wait).
Help or advice appreciated.
Edit: the edits applied about 14 minutes after I posted. I was under the impression this process would take a few more days. Thanks again, everyone!