https://musicbrainz.org/edit/51461811
I need this edit to be ‘yes’ voted. (or no, if you think it is wrong, lol)
I need to merge an artist into this artist, but I need the name change to happen first, to prevent a “failed dependency”.
No edit note, no evidence supplied here either as to why your edit is correct
1 Like
I’d love to do some voting and help out, though I need those ten confirmed edits yet. I’m not picky about it if anyone just wants to pick and choose, though I’ve been trying to get this guy’s releases up: https://musicbrainz.org/artist/d4c3266d-666d-4b8c-914f-a325be4142bd
I entered https://musicbrainz.org/edit/51621488 and then realized there are a bunch of other recordings I screwed up in matching to this release when I added it (some were from a DJ-mixed album that I had no idea going in was a DJ-mix). I could attempt to fix them now, but since this edit adds track times it would make it easier if any further fixes could be done after it went through.
help vote for an edit. Appreciate your thoughts on it. Thanks.
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/51612161
Can you please vote on https://musicbrainz.org/release/432826c5-941e-4a1a-b7f2-2bdf2d9fcb6c/open_edits
The edits are based on the discussion here: How do we remove releases from a release group?
I wouldn’t have minded waiting for a few days for it to get auto-accepted, but I got a warning saying the release group will get purged soon if it is not associated with a release. If it gets purged, the auto-accepts will fail too.
Please have a look at https://musicbrainz.org/edit/51775639
I feel like my reasoning is a waste of time.
I’d be grateful if an auto-editor could approve this sequence of edits of mine. I stupidly batch-added a bunch of works (scenes from Tosca) that already existed. I should really have then, as penance, merged each of them into the corresponding existing work, but that looked like it would be quite time-consuming, so instead I batch-removed all the relationships I’d just added to them. Once these are gone, hopefully the new duplicate works will disappear.
If anyone is bored and wants to help kick a vote through - help much appreciated. Especially as this album is newly released and I expect a number of people using this data for tagging in coming days.
Details here: Need help correcting wrongly named release
I am merging a broken entry into a good entry. See full editing history if you want the conversations. (Including a bit of a natter between me and the original editor)
This is the merge that needs the votes please:
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/51898054
Be careful to note the collection of different catalogue numbers and barcodes here. The barcode and catalogue number of the outer slipcase is used for the Deluxe release.
Any other feedback appreciated. 
Hello,
I would like to become an Auto-Editor, nominate me, please.
In my spare time I am engaged in adding music to musicbrainz that does not exist there, which I buy through bandcamp.
I have an understanding of styleguides and also a desire to work for the benefit of the community.
My musicbrainz profile: https://musicbrainz.org/user/roman412
Thank you.
1 Like
I need some votes here: https://musicbrainz.org/edit/51965069 and https://musicbrainz.org/edit/51965070.
The issue is that a track has been consistently printed as “怱怱” (pronounced “chong chong”). 怱 is a more obscure way of writing 匆 (also pronounced “chong”), but both Chinese characters mean the same. 怱 is definitely not a typo, because it has been printed this way in the initial release and re-releases. The Mandarin translation of the Cantonese song bears the same title and is also printed as “怱怱” in the Taiwan and Chinese mainland releases. The other editor is trying to say that we should use “匆匆” instead because it is more commonly written as so.
2 Likes
I need some votes to correct a wrongly added disc ID. I’ve got lent some library CDs by Doldinger/passport and some discs were in the wrong package. Checked to late…
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/52114979 (faulty disc ID; 8 tracks)
https://musicbrainz.org/cdtoc/attach?toc=1+10+268799+150+30795+50497+79715+97622+120081+147672+169604+192804+220761&filter-release.query=passport+to+morocco (correct disc ID; 10 tracks)
Thanks
I got a no vote on a routine featured artist edit because of some uncited conflict with Last.fm’s data.
I’m having a problem as the editor is forcing an ISNI sort and that’s blocking other edits I want to make.
Is a remix with 100% new music a new work or a recording of the original work?
I share this view:
But I’ll let you all decide:
PS: Please, just one vote!
So there’s this one editor who likes to add disambiguation comments to recordings, regardless of whether they’re needed or not. I entered a bunch of edits to clean up some of these unnecessary disambiguations and got bombed with No votes: title because long URL is looooong
This same editor also hit me with a barrage of No votes to remove non-existent relationships (after I called him out for adding them).
2 Likes
Can somebody tell me what’s going on with this edit?
I submitted it about a week ago to update the artist credits. The waiting period on the edit has ended but I am not seeing the changes in MB or in Picard.
Ignore this question. I don’t know if there was a delay in the waiting period expiring and the changes showing up on the website and in Picard but the changes are showing up now.
Hello everyone,
Could you please vote for this change, or maybe an auto-editor can do it : https://musicbrainz.org/edit/52316987
I think I made a mistake to solve a recording conflict, and adding this disembiguation string was not a good idea at all IMO.
Thanks in advance!