Unsanctioned Featuring Credits?

MusicBrainz Style
1

hello! been reading a lot of the forum posts lately, and i’ve found the answers to most of my questions, but i am still curious about this. i read this discussion, where an unsanctioned featuring credit was a joke, and stayed part of the title because of artist intent.

but in cases where the artist intent is unclear, what’s the solution there? if a song contains samples from an artist and they are credited as features, should the features be entered in as normal, or should they just be credited on the recording and/or work level?

here’s an example of what i mean.

i obviously don’t have a problem entering them as normal features, it’s not like it’s more work lol, i just wonder if them showing up in the artists’ discographies might bother people. don’t wanna get yelled at later haha. would love to hear how y’all normally go about this.

sorry i’ve been making so many posts lol

2

When intent is unclear, follow the style guides. In this case, the relevant style guide says the featured artist should not be in the track title. It should be in the artist credit.

1 Like
3

A different way to look at it. MusicBrainz is a database. It records which artists are involved with which tracks. If the artist is involved in anyway, or is being sampled, then that featuring should link to that artist.

If you hear Super Hans or TRAMP STAMPS in the track, then it makes sense they are a clickable artist.

If you are just reading a joke title, It’s Made of Cheese (featuring the Man in the Moon), then it stays in the title.

2 Likes
4

thank you both for the answers! this makes sense to me now :smiley: