Voting/Auto-editor Request Thread

Tags: #<Tag:0x00007f756e3ca588> #<Tag:0x00007f756e3ca4c0> #<Tag:0x00007f756e3ca380>

These two NO votes to relationships I have linked have puzzled me. They seem to be against the principle of linking related data in a database because a human can already read something on a page.

My question here:

Edits here:
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/67153245
https://musicbrainz.org/edit/67158069

Obviously, give me a sensible reply and I’ll go and remove my No votes. :slight_smile: Currently my believe is these edits both remove relevant relationships.

1 Like

for me Karlsruhe is just wrong. If a concert would take place at Munich Airport, Munich also would be the wrong place. Because the airport is located in the area of Freising. While I get your point, Karlsruhe is still in the release group and release, so it’s easy to find. From a geographer’s standpoint getting the link to the right area is an important thing :wink:

1 Like

I am sorry I picked the wrong example due to my lack of knowledge of Germany geography.

I have now totally stepped away from all of the Gabriel and recording locations it as it has been made clear to me that I know nothing about databases.

I’ve cleaned up a few of the N/A artists’ credits.

A bunch of DJ-mix RGs will have the compilation type removed. To my interpretation of the style guide and at least one other editor I can’t see why that should be done.

1 Like

Just a note to mention that a discussion on Chopin’s name in MB has broadened, as it seemed useful to clarify the guidelines to name composers in MB. It’s posted in the Classical section, as we have many issues naming classical composers (Chopin, Liszt, Tchaikovsky, …). It may also be of interest for other composers.

There is a vote opened to clarify guideline on composer naming. I thought that a note here would help to ensure that all concerned could vote or provide comments.

1 Like

All the credits were entered as aliases of [unknown]. I’ve fixed that.

Update: More edits have been added. :hot_face:

2 Likes

Can someone take a look at the edits on this release and make sure everything was done right / in a logical order? A space was missing in the release title, some artist credits were misspelled or in track titles instead of artist credits, and it looks like when it was first entered they had an auto-translator on, which was fixed in the tracklist but not in the individual release titles. https://musicbrainz.org/release/40c860d4-8fb4-431c-a87c-3cd1f75b5d1e/edits

If there is a bored Auto-Editor around with a mass voting script it would be helpful to bulk approve these.

( Works written by Ozric Tentacles )
( Works written by Ed Wynne for the Ozrics )

I have cleaned up a mistake made on all the Ozric Tentacles Works. All but one of their tracks is just music without words. So they are all Work Type [blank] and Lyrics [No Lyrics].

Once these are all kicked through I can check for any that got missed.

Thanks :+1:

Korean singles marketed as OST. What should their primary type be: single, other or maybe something entirely new?

1 Like

https://musicbrainz.org/user/susanst

A user has taken the “sour grapes” approach to voting.
For the most part, they are voting ‘no’ on my edits (out of spite for my no votes on theirs). If it was just that, I would point you to my open edit page. But they have also taken to voting the opposite as I have voted on a few edits.

Regardless of which, some of the edits are going to close in the next few hours, so I was hoping that anyone that looks at the vote history will start with those first, as they are the priority.

I assume you have hit the “Report this user for bad behaviour” link in that profile.

1 Like

Yes, I did. But at the time, there was 4 hours remaining on some of those edits.
I thought it might be more expedient to round up some votes.

2 Likes

Could I get some votes on this please?
[has been approved ]
Keen to correctly tag some files, thank you!!

edit: SO speedy, thank you @chaban!

Redundant info which is already stored in relationships is being removed from titles but there is an opposing view arguing that it’s worth keeping due to the UI.

I edit mostly classical music, but in this case the analogy is obvious: the musical is for all practical purposes a modern form of opera :slight_smile: , and approach established on MusicBrainz for operas may be easily applied to musicals as well.

In both cases (operas and musicals):

  • There is a large umbrella work which consists of smaller parts.
  • Usually the umbrella work is performed and recorded as a whole.
  • But sometimes smaller parts are performed and recorded separately as stand-alone pieces.

The common approach on MusicBrainz for classical music, including operas:

  • Keep track names as printed on CD (include name of the umbrella work only if it is printed on the CD).
  • For work names, keep the name of the main work in the title of parts as a prefix. Example from classical music: Acis and Galatea, HWV 49: Act I, no. 7. Aria “Love in her eyes sits playing” (Acis). The main work is “Acis and Galatea”, which consists of Acts (intermediate sub-parts), which consists of Numbers (smallest sub-parts). Applying this approach to the case in question, the work name probably shall be “My Fair Lady: On the Street Where You Live”.

Just for your reference, here is a classical release “The Enjoyment of Opera” with arias from various operas, which is for all purposes similar to your release “Great Songs From The Musicals”: a collection of parts of larger works, recorded as stand-alone pieces.

3 Likes

I agree that the musical name does not belong in the “recording” title. What I do not understand is the lack of standardization in the “track” title naming. Look at Simply Musicals and Great Songs From The Musicals one has the musical name at the beginning of the track name and the other does not. Does the musical name belong in the track title or not (or is that up to the individual contributor), on both of these releases it is shown on the art work.

1 Like

@dashv: theres no specific guidelines for track titles in our “theatre” guidelines, so our generic guidelines apply which say to stay as close as possible to the back cover: Which means that e.g. all tracks on https://musicbrainz.org/release/07b1ff30-f407-4c25-85c8-b7d85943cfe2 are wrong and should include the umbrella work, as on cover … (either as “My Fair Lady: On the Street Where You Live” or as "On the Street Where You Live (from: “My Fair Lady”)

1 Like

Actually I couldn’t agree more with alex–s7. I never understood why we would have different guidelines for Theatre, Opera, Operetta and Musicals, which all are “Plays” basically meant to be seen/heard as a whole… and all share the equal importance of Writers (Composers) and Performers which MusicBrainz has to cope with…

Your statement that “all tracks on Great Songs From the Musicals are wrong” appears incorrect.
The Musicals are shown in bright red after the track title, indicating that they are not part of it but are extra title information (https://musicbrainz.org/doc/Style/Titles#Extra_title_information). The example at the end of that style guide implies that linking to the Work is the way to go.