Voting/Auto-editor Request Thread

4 posts were split to a new topic: Handling name of transgender artist

I edited

splitting the artists in teir individial pages Julian Argüelles - MusicBrainz , The Radio Bigband Frankfurt - MusicBrainz , Gwilym Simcock - MusicBrainz , according to Discogs release: now the page Julian Arguelles and The Frankfurt Radio Big Band - MusicBrainz should be deleted?
Moreover, I merged the two pages The Radio Bigband Frankfurt - MusicBrainz and hr-Bigband - MusicBrainz , aliases of the same group: could you please check this edit in order to complete linking esternal information to the resulting page?

There is a duplicate of

with inverted release and artist: how to deal with this entry?

I’d remove unnamed tracks 17-20 (can’t find any evidence for a 20 track release) and then merge the bad release into one of the others.

1 Like

Edited both the release (1, 2) and release group of the wrong entry, waiting for the edits to take effect in order to proceed to merge both of them

Could you please explain why the release

is not listed in the artist’s page?

Release groups with only promotional or bootleg releases in them wont show by default on the artist page. You have to click (Show all release groups) at the bottom.

edit: I use @jesus2099’s script ‘ALL RELEASE GROUPS’ to display everything by default.
forum thread | script


Time to pry apart another artist! This time it is Seraph from Seraph!


I very rarely delete a release but this one seemed to warrant removal. Edit #80725245 - MusicBrainz

There should be a massive search and replace in

of the artist

with the artist

Is there any tool to perform such substitution?

Common sense should say that this artist was hijacked long long ago.

I would have thought this is an occasion where the Majority wins. Rename the Artists. If the current majority of Works are associated to the “wrong” artist then it is really the artist naming that is incorrect now.

Some release, like

could be of the American artist: the renaming may be too drastic.

I am looking at the percentage. If currently over 80% point to UK Tom Kane then logic says that is who that artist is. And the small handful that is the USA Thomas Kane can be moved to a new artist.

I don’t make the guidelines, just work on Common Sense. Majority of database users will currently have this as UK Tom Kane.


So the idea is to swap the “Artist Details”, “Date Period”, "Relationships " and “External Links” of the two artists using the “Edit” tab of the artist’a page: right?

1 Like

Please vote on Edit #80786863 - MusicBrainz

Long story short, I accidentally added a bunch of empty media when copying from duplicated releases, and I can’t fix them. So I have re-created the release, and please help me delete the one I have screwed up.

That is what I would do, but then I am no AE. To me it looks like the “original” Tom is seen by 90% of database users as UK Tom. So I would make him UK Tom by editing in UK Tom’s these details on the artist page you list.

Once done, I’d then make a new USA Tom to move over the small number of releases that are associated to him.

The fact no one is diving in to shout NO at this suggestion is making me think this is likely acceptable.

Not only is this quicker to complete, but it also makes less breaks to the database for all the people who have already tagged with Tom UK as the artist.

Different opinion, if you don’t mind doing the extra work I personally would move the ‘Colin Baldry’ Tom into their own artist. Just because it seems like the other Tom lived at that MBID since 2008, and then the new one came to visit in 2018. Although he’s been busier since then I’m not sure I would let him kick out old Tom :+1:

If I understand the edit history correctly.

I don’t think it really matters either way @PierPiero as long as it’s tidy (and honestly, separating artists like this can be pretty fun!)


The USA Tom has an older record in MB, but in data volume years the UK Tom has by far the larger volume of data attached. If all of those thousands of links were changed then you will make many more database users have duff data than if USA Tom is moved.

It would be a near on impossibly time consuming task to move all the ELEVEN PAGES of recordings for UK Tom over to a new Tom artist anyway.

(Haha - and don’t use “You” as this is just an issue I am trying to assist with a solution :wink: If you are keen to manually move all those thousands of recordings to a different Tom thereby breaking many many people’s collections then that’s your weekend task, not mine. :rofl: I vote the simple option for least database changes, therefore least disruption )

Edit: Unless I am missing something, USA Tom has only a SINGLE TWO references in this whole database. Thomas Kane - Relationships - MusicBrainz and he is Henery Hawk

All the rest is UK Tom isn’t it? And he got his first reference attached to that artist in 2009, not 2018. It was lukz_bot that picked the wrong Tom Kane from wikipedia. (Look at the edits on the actual Artist page)

1 Like

Hmm yes, it seems that way. Seems I mistakenly thought those earlier releases (up to 2018) all belonged to the same earlier Tom. There’s three Tom’s I now gather?

Don’t worry, I was talking to PierPiero, I just worded it dumb :+1:

11 pages of relationships sounds ‘impossibly time consuming’ but it’s usually just changing the releases and ticking the ‘copy artist to recordings’ field. It’s also not that destructive - release and recording MBID’s stay intact. It’s the artist MBID which changes. My thinking is that if another database has been using the MBID to represent voice actor Tom for 10 years*, it’s weird to have it jump to a newer (albeit more active) artist.
*which I understand now is not the case, it was already jumbled within a year or so?

But that was just another point of view, I’ll jump in now and do some splitting out as well @PierPiero


That seemed the destructive part to me. And yes, some of us keep track of artist IDs in our external databases. KODI uses them. It is nice to see common sense in operation. :slight_smile:

That’s my default mode on here. :rofl: