Voting/Auto-editor Request Thread

Hello there.

I am merging 2 live recordings from LP and CD editions of same compilation, named Sorry for the joke. :wink:

Their duration does not match but LP durations and where their ‘‘tracks’’ are split are theoretical things.

Please give me your opinions, because I can just cancel merges:

Maybe I am overzealous merging them.


Edit #78518598

needed for merge.

Hi everyone,

I’m throwing a controversial edit here :
That’s something I wanted to do for quite a long time in order to settle this subject once and for all (as it’s something really important for SensCritique database too).

Thanks and cheers !

I’ve got some edits that I could do with a second opinion on.

This is a DVD+CD release of a concert, with 12 of the 17 DVD tracks repeated on the CD and with changes in length in some cases. Unfortunately, the same recordings are being used for both the DVD and CD tracks. An easy enough fix: I’ve flagged the recordings being used only for the DVD as videos and created new video recordings for the ones that are incorrectly being shared with the CD.

But here’s a spanner in the works:

The DVD on this release has what should be the CD’s tracklist and the CD has the first 12 tracks from the DVD. The track lengths are the same on both mediums, despite having different songs. It has the same Disc ID as other CDs in the group and a search for the barcode on eBay returns this, which appears to be the same as this Discogs entry. I’m assuming the MB entry is wrong then and it should actually be the standard 17-track DVD and 12-track CD, same as the others in the release group.

With that in mind, these 5 edits will change the recordings which are apparently on the Australian/New Zealand CD into video ones:,,, and I’d like to hear some other thoughts on them.

1 Like

I’d like some more eyes on this artist split for Rez x Oscob.

Requesting vote on the following merges:

I happened to have both sides of these releases in my collection, and have listened to them and they seem identical.

P.S. The artist attributing seems a bit confusing, and I have opened a separate forum post for the current situation: Record label gets mistaken as artist?

A few more merges to go here:

I originally thought that they’re different, but after digging deeper into the respective discography entries and listening them, it seems that they’re the same, just under different title variations and different volumes.

I’d appreciate approval of this tracklist order fix: so I can add the disc ID.

This CD is missing the bonus tracks, so I would appreciate some votes to add them

I’d appreciate auto-approval or up-voting of these edits, which are fixing some errors by a new contributor:

and also the edits on these releases:

1 Like

I’d appreciate some votes on these 11 edits that solidify the proper cataloging of 2 groups:

  1. “Yuji Ohno & Lupintic Five”, a group established in 2006.
  2. “Yuji Ohno & Lupintic Six”, a group established in 2016.

For sources and more details, refer to my edit notes.

I would like to ask for approval of this edit: — nope, screwed up, cancelled.

Actually use this one: and it also contains corrections to the track titles (double-checked with discography entry and print booklet).

The release was originally missing a track, and I have just added it. Without this being approved, I would be unable to add the disc ID from the CD that had just arrived in mail.

P.S. I have also changed the release artist, per this discussion: How should we handle doujin music?

The simultaneous artist change (and now also version name changes) prevent me from voting.

Could you link to some package photo or something?

There is no indication of the source reference in the edit notes.

Cover art have already been uploaded: (especially the “back” one) - I didn’t read the packaging carefully enough when uploading, and only realized that I screwed up today.

The justification for the re-assigning the artist was raised by @FichteFoll and @tojikomori
Relevant discussion: How should we handle doujin music?
Relevant discussion 2 (cancelled edit):

Update: looks like another editor familiar with doujin music has approved the change.

Edits should be self contained. :wink:
Especially drastic changes, should include everything, for reviewing and for the record.
Forums migrate and disappear (and there was no links in the edit note), Cover Art was not mentioned and not linked, etc.
It’s just advice for the future. For the sake of edit histories that give confidence.

BTW I have just now noticed that you were fixing your own added release. I would have seen that, I would have voted yes regardless the lack of elements. It helps to say in the edit note that you are just fixing your own Edit #78558789 - Add medium. :slight_smile::+1:


A bit OT, but I tried making commits more atomic, and had been screwed up a few times due to dependencies. :frowning:


Seeking some votes on these two edits:

I think I have sorted out the “Kas”es.

1 Like

I would appreciate acceleration of this edit splitting out a new recording so I can add some details.

1 Like

Remi & REMI are a bit mixed up. Even I’ve fallen into this morass. Let’s disentangle them!