Suggestions for how to handle deleting a partial broadcast tracklist

I was wondering if people could suggest how best to handle this situation. I’ve been trying to add and make consistent the existing release of BBC 1 Radio Essential Mix:

I’ve come across one release was in the incorrect release group:

I’ve now created and moved it to a new correct release group:

However as per my comments on the edit above I feel like this release should perhaps be deleted since it is only a partial part of the entire broadcast. Is that the right thing to do?

1 Like

They don’t like you deleting things around here. Is there any way it can be merged into the real thing?

When you merge the Releases all the MBID’s are kept so anyone referring to it from external will still find it.

Ah, I see one is separate tracks and the other is just a single track.

When I look at those releases they leave me a little confused as so much is in the annotation. The one that is being removed at least linked some of the tracks, so I can understand why that editor had done that. I have to admit I am not fully up to date on how radio shows are added.

So in the past I’ve now used the DJ Mix AR to link to recordings used. For example:

Ideally I’d do that with these tracks, but without the ability to skip missing recordings it’s not possible.

The original edit has this as the source:

I am not familiar with the site or BBC1 Essential Mixes so I’m unclear as to whether that’s a ‘release’ or just a user-made tracklist? If that page is what you would consider a ‘release’ then it doesn’t matter if it’s complete or not, it’s valid. If not, you can remove it.
The grey area is if it’s fan made but downloadable/people use it to tag, in which case leaving it and marking it as a bootleg might be the way to go.

Thanks @aerozol. That page just lists that one DJ’s part of the broadcast. The entire broadcast features all 6 DJ’s. I consider this a more realistic source of the broadcast tracklist:

Unfortunately the BBC website has a gap in their archives from around 2009-2012 so I can list to an official source, but mixesdb is usually very reliable.

I think given what you’ve said changing it to be a bootleg maybe the best way to go.

Thanks again.