Voting/Auto-editor Request Thread

Please write something in the posts that gives us context and reasons to click those transom edit links. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

To explain what I mean, here is the latest “good post” example. :wink:

Update: But I don’t mean to be that complete. Just saying why votes would be welcome to an open edit in particular. :sweat_smile:


This tracklist resize needs to be applied instantly as TOC does not fit CD#3, thanks.

1 Like can i get a couple extra eyes on this

I am a newbie to MB, I just added a lot of Yiddish/Jewish releasees.

Can someone check on them, and make sure I entered them correctly.


1 Like

I added the music arranger to a album.

Is this the right way to do it?


3 posts were split to a new topic: Help identifying packaging

I added a duplicate album,

What’s the correct way to remove?

You can merge them by clicking Merge in each sidebar.


Edit #103728102 - Merge labels is currently on track to fail. The failure of this edit would upend decades of MusicBrainz precedent regarding how to categorize Sony Music Entertainment Japan releases.

Can someone tell me if this edit of mine (editing medium format) is correct?

What I know for sure it’s not a MiniDisc, since according to Release / Format - MusicBrainz they were available only from 1991, and that single was released in 1988.



Hi! I found a messed up merge: Edit #103636855 - MusicBrainz Basically, two similar recordings of the Mozart Requiem have been merged when they shouldn’t have been. They are two different completions of the requiem (Süßmayr and Beyer) and it should be easy to split the recording, as only one track has been merged (so we can look at each release and check which completion all the other tracks have). What’s the best way to resolve this? Should I create a new recording and put all the recordings of the Beyer in it and leave the Süßmayr in the other one?

11 posts were split to a new topic: How to add and properly link a video recording?

I just entered edits to remove several Disc IDs from this release. The first 3, from several days ago, I’m pretty confident about, since their total times were 20+ seconds different. The other 7 are all pre-NGS additions, and they are all attached to several releases (more than 10, in most cases). But they are all within a second or two of the one I have confirmed by my in-hand release, so I’m not as confident in my edit. So I’m just asking for some eyes to make sure I haven’t gone overboard. I only hit the ones where I can see when they were added in Edit History.


Not my edit, but I think this needs to be discussed further.

1 Like

Your documented version has only one discID. I don’t see a problem if you want to remove all the others. None of them are only attached to this release.


A few I would leave as they still seem to have the same TOC. Edit history shows only one other DiscID ever added to this release and that has a single track one second different to @Beckfield’s TOC. So I’d keep that one at least.

But as I replied in the edit notes - strongly believe napalm is often best used on a release with 17 discIDs… :fire: :fire:

I think you meant “post-NGS,” and, yes, I didn’t delete that one. There are also a few that apparently weren’t directly added to this release – probably came from merges or something – which I chose to leave alone.

1 Like

Yes - post-NGS. Anything before then are easy to ignore as they can be anywhere in the world (and often include scrap data anyway as they didn’t seem to be as well checked back then)

Only post-NGS can you be sure it was attached to this actual edition.


But even just one sector difference indicates a different manufacturer… :wink:

Trouble is some software that creates the DiscIDs runs different algorithms. It is rare, but I have seen some examples of two different discIDs on the same release.

I would love to say “rip em all out if it don’t match the ONE”… but sometimes it can’t be done (we are going OT for this thread and someone will get upset…)

1 Like