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: https://musicbrainz.org/edit/78843447 so I can add the disc ID.
This CD is missing the bonus tracks, so I would appreciate some votes to add them
I would like to ask for approval of this edit: https://musicbrainz.org/edit/79279978 — nope, screwed up, cancelled.
Actually use this one: https://musicbrainz.org/edit/79281769 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: https://musicbrainz.org/release/966e2f7a-1ab4-446a-8c92-5cbf26efdae3/cover-art (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): https://musicbrainz.org/edit/79041755
Update: looks like another editor familiar with doujin music has approved the change.
Edits should be self contained.
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 that you are just fixing your own Edit #78558789 - Add medium.
A bit OT, but I tried making commits more atomic, and had been screwed up a few times due to dependencies.
I would appreciate acceleration of this edit splitting out a new recording so I can add some details.
Remi & REMI are a bit mixed up. Even I’ve fallen into this morass. Let’s disentangle them!
I’m trying to clean up a large box set added by a new editor. I had to split several mediums into two (multiple double vinyl albums had originally been submitted as one medium), and while I was doing that I encountered a mile-long indecipherable error message and hit the submit button a second time, which caused two of the new mediums I created to be submitted a second time (as well as completely jumbling the mediums, which I was able to fix).
Hi, could I get some quick votes on this edit please? I had initially entered a single track based on the back cover, but the CD is indeed split in 10 tracks. Once this is applied, I can attach a Disc ID.
I’d appreciate votes on the following recording merge edits. I created new recordings for a release I’ve added before realising the relevant recordings were already in the database (with the same lengths, performers, recording venue, recording year, and associated with EMI).
Some uncertainty over if an artist name change warrants a separate entity: Edit #74653775 - MusicBrainz
Not my edits, but it would be helpful if I could get some votes on these. The release date was brought forward by a week and is now live in some countries: