Edit #49993759 got me thinking about this again. Sometimes an edition of a release will come out and have a designation such as “special edition”; usually we deem these descriptions to be ETI and relegate them to the disambiguation box. However, there are occasionally more verbose designations (e.g. “The Complete Narrated Version” as shown in the above edit) and it seems wrong for these to be ETI. They feel, to me at least, more like a subtitle. Is there a line we need to draw between the two? Is said line already there, and if there is where is it?
in this specific instance, i think it has to be part of the title. And I will vote so on that specific edit.
But, in general, there should be a title/disambiguate difference.
Not everything falls into black and white. Oddballs like this can be discussed when they occur.
I just wanted to add - I actually voted no for this specific edit and discussed why in the comments.
I am not sure if your vote is in the spirit of MB.
If you think it is an improvement on the data the vote should be yes, even if it’s not perfect. If you think it can be further improved (eg with capitalization), then that edit can be made (by you or someone else) later.
Sure, we can edit it later. Which was sort of the idea behind the no vote - we can do the correct edit after.
But, as I still consider myself new (at some point I have to quit using that excuse), I have no problem changing it to a yes, if you think it is better to have the information there.
This is especially true since the edit to correct the capitalization would be an auto-edit. I would recommend everyone to read this blog post: https://blog.musicbrainz.org/2015/01/09/editing-making-musicbrainz-better/. This looks like the first case to me.
No votes can be extremely discouraging for users, I believe that’s the main reason we do it this way, even if it does take longer for the correct edit to happen! Otherwise people feel like they need to learn all 10,000 of MB’s rules before making any changes
This seems a bit confused, because extra title information should usually go in the title field (maybe that’s what you meant to write). It’s a complicated issue in general, but I agree that it should be a subtitle in this case.
In the context of release titles? I don’t think I’ve ever seen ETI in a release title.
Well, that’s what the edit you linked did. @tigerman325 and @mmirG discussed it in the notes. It’s clearly what the guidelines say; disambiguation comments are for disambiguation, but there is definitely a trend of putting ETI in them anyway.
I think disambiguation comments should sometimes be used for text that is even further removed (thematically) from the title than ETI. You might say that if you’re tempted to represent something exactly as it is written, instead of just using the essentials for disambiguation, it shouldn’t go in the disambiguation comment.
My general opinion is: if something like “Foo Edition” printed on the front cover or spine, it’s a subtitle. If it’s only on a sticker or similar, it’s disambiguation.