All bot edits are planned in advance but who will look at it?
Edits appear in our subscriptions, not the bot planning.
Fair point, because Im concentrating on a particular data item (e.g mb artist links to disocgs) and dont use subscriptions I forget that the majority of editors focus on particular artists.
On particular something, yes, most often. 
For me, I do focus my edits and votes on my releases (my CD collection).
With some exceptions, I’m subscribed only to my release collection, not artists.
1 Like
@jesus2909 Are you able to change my user type to bot it has not been done yet.
Okay @Zaz could you do this please, you gave the concept a thumbs up some time ago Is there any kind of project to improve holes in MusicBrainz coverage - #36 by Zas
2 Likes
Okay, i just done that.
1 Like
Adding has started! For the first few hundred, I’d be thankful to get users’ eyes on them to make sure the error rate seems low enough and no adjustments need to be made. Can people take a look at the bot’s edits and let @ijabz and me know if anything seems problematic? 
3 Likes
Looks good so far. But to be fair the main way I would check these is scanning for the same albums in each discography, which the bot does already anyway 
1 Like
HI, I have fixed the & in artist name problem, improved formatting and added name of shared release name plus provide link to MusicBrainz and Discogs release to the edit note.
Added another 100 edits with the new edit note, so please let me know if any other problems
3 Likes
Okay I have started running the bot properly, plan is to do one page of report a day.
3 Likes
Nearly upto 50,000 edits and no problems with the edits so far
The trouble is every day I have to open the report and select the next page, and some days i just forget.
4 Likes
The notes that the bot makes are quite confusing if one asks for more information about its provenance. I’m not sure if a human wrote the following:
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/88090823
I actually cannot understand the automatic reply given above. It seems to imply that this forum thread is mentioned in edit notes, which it obviously isn’t, and anyway the reply there is really difficult grammatically for me to understand.
No, there’s nothing wrong with the edit, and thanks for making the bot. I am just trying to provide feedback to the bot because the response to the edit made no sense to me.
I find the bot’s second comment on the edit thoroughly confusing and misleading, because I felt that it implied something that wasn’t borne out by the original edit note, so I decided to reply to this thread to provide you with feedback to improve it.
1 Like
If there is nothing wrong with the edit i dont see the point of your original comment, i don’t understand what you expect from me
I think you can improve it just by signposting this thread, either in the edit notes or on the bot’s profile page. I had to reply to the edit note to find that out. That is, the edits are fine, but the edit note and/or the bot profile page can be improved.
Kia ora, I think there’s been some wires crossed unfortunately. I don’t think the reply was a bot/auto reply?
I can totally see why @iolomorganwg thought it was implying the link and user was self-evident, but I don’t think that’s what @ijabz was saying:
- started their sentence answering your second question - user ijabz
- answered your first question - with …from the report [link] as explained in the edit notes
- and then followed up with a link to this discussion for reference
Anyway, very unfortunate to have this happen, it’s a great bot and great to have user feedback, so let’s appreciate each other 
@iolomorganwg, btw the docs require bots to be prefixed with their ‘owners’ name, so you can always message the owner
@ijabz while I’m looking at it now, maybe the initial note could be formatted a bit differently. Long sentences are difficult for non-native speakers and many others to parse, because grammar. Just a thought, it’s fine as is otherwise. e.g.
Added from http://reports.albunack.net/mbartist_discogsarti…
Found matching Discogs artist: The MusicBrainz artist name is The Coleman Country Traditional Society and the Discogs artist name is The Coleman Country Traditional Society, and has matching releases.
The shared release name is Music from the Coleman Country
MusicBrainz release: https://musicbrainz.org/release/2d41bbd6-1b8a-4b…
Discogs release: https://www.discogs.com/release/13837459
Edit: maybe a link to this discussion as iolomorgan is saying, but that’s up to ijabz I believe
7 Likes
I really dont really understand why the original edit comment was made, but I have added a link to this topic the on the bot profile page
From memory I found there was an issue trying to get newlines rendered correctly when preseeding the musicbrainz edit, but also I think it reads better as a sentence so Im not going to start changing that now.
Thank you for adding the link to the bot profile page. I really appreciate it.
I was mostly concerned at the second comment not the wording of the first one, but I think @aerozol’s suggestion wouldn’t be to its detriment by any means.
1 Like