seeking opinions/votes, no auto-editing required
I’d like some opinions on this.
For those out of the loop, I made the ticket for the “artistic director” relationship 3 years ago, not realizing that the same relationship could be applied to individual artists as well. Something inside me says this is inappropriate, but my knowledge is limited.
and now, unfortunately, the retaliatory edits/votes happen.
Retaliate is a strong word, maybe “sour grape edits” is a better word to use. Maybe “use A to justify B” edits.
background: the original edit is a simple removal of disambiguation. No biggie. No real right or wrong answer with that. Except, in the meantime, someone (me) added 2 artists of the same name. Both are songwriters with works listed at BMI, not random YouTube artists.
So, the editor decided with the two new edits:
- merge a possible match even though no one has been able to confirm they are the same. Even I suspect they are the same but am unable to confirm. Anecdotal is all I find. Nothing that says, absolutely, yes, merge. (which is why I created the artist instead of adding it to the original)
- Rename the other artist so that the original artist is again the only remaining artist of that exact name, which would justify the original edit (removal of disambiguation). This would also make the newly named artist a one-of-a-kind named artist, which would not require disambiguation.
So, we start with 3 same-named artists with 3 disambiguation. The end result, if the edits go through, would be 2 different named artists with 0 disambiguation.
Take a look. Read the history. Voice opinions. Vote.
Can somebody please approve https://musicbrainz.org/edit/82981558 so the medium of this rather poor release I’m trying to improve could be changed to a CD.
To do: fix the tracklist and re-create the incorrectly merged recording for track 9.
I want some input on this. Maybe I’ve misunderstood the guidelines for the past 6 years and the 100s of edits I’ve seen dealing with this.
i mistakenly added a new rg when importing from atisket. if i could get approve or yes votes, i would appreciate it!!
I need some votes (a lot of them!) to untangle some merged works.
Conversely, I believe these edits are wrong, and would like to request votes on
I have outlined my reasoning in the split discussion The Final Fantasy Prelude(s) - #4 by yindesu
definitely. if it says “ep” on bandcamp, it’s definitely an ep.
looking for opinions on this edit please! https://musicbrainz.org/edit/83150692
This may need separated into its own discussion. But I’d like some eyes on the open edits of Walt Whitman
Wondering why aren’t all these case fixings simple auto-edits?
I think it is because the auto-edit only works on a track name and not an artist name. I corrected a Featuring to featuring earlier and that is also stuck in limbo.
I seem to be visiting this place more often
A conflated MB and a conflated Discogs (which was mostly fixed a couple years ago) led to the recent creation of a new MB.
But which name should it be?
The full legal name, which does not “require” disambiguation. Or the proper artist name, which is an exact name match and therefore will require disambiguation.
i did not say disambiguation will be unneccessary. if you feel the need to add disambiguation, you can, but i am extending the name because that is literally the artist’s name.
Could I get some people to take a look at these edits I’ve made that have been voted down:
- Edit #83381437 - MusicBrainz
- Edit #83380803 - MusicBrainz
- Edit #83380810 - MusicBrainz
- Edit #83381532 - MusicBrainz
- Edit #83380798 - MusicBrainz
- Edit #83382671 - MusicBrainz
They are all to fix up disambiguation comments on recordings that are different from the disambiguation comments on the other recordings on the same release.
(my take away is that I should’ve explained this in the Edit Note).