When is "reissue" appropriate as disambiguation

MusicBrainz Style
1

I’ve seen “reissue” being added as disambiguation on many releases lately, I assume because discogs uses it on everything that isn’t the original release.

Do we consider that meaningful? If so, almost every release would have it, except for the original release.

I think it would be reserved for disambiguating a release that is identical as far as barcode, etc. but has some subtle change in content/artwork that would define it as a new release.

Opinions?

5 Likes
2

To me a “reissue” has to have had some kind of change. This could be artwork, barcode, new booklet added. More likely it is extra tracks or even totally remastered.

There needs to be something different - not just a reprint of the same disk.

As a collector I’d want to know if there was a difference worth nothing.

I don’t see that having any need of disambiguation text though. It should just get a new Release entry in the same Release group.

Look at Dark Side Of The Moon as an example:

66 different versions listed there… and I know there are many more. Some of these are remixed, repackaged, generally fiddled around with compared with the original. None of these get a (reissue). Though when that reissue actually has a specific sub-title \ anniversary then those details do get into the disambiguation.

This seems sensible to me.

Whatever decision is made we need the site help files updated to mirror it. I’m finding too many of these discussions are only in the form and the decisions are therefore lost to most users.

3 Likes
3

In cases like those I usually use something that describes what that subtle change is, e.g. “‘Made in Switzerland’ on disc label.”
To your point on “reissue” as a disambiguation, I believe it’s pretty much meaningless. One can easily tell by a number of alternate means (e.g. comparing the release dates or medium formats) that a particular release is a reissue.

4 Likes
4

I think the issue I’m seeing is that Discogs labels almost everything as a reissue (look at the Pink Floyd discogs entries) and new editors are just kind of blindly bringing info from over there.

4 Likes
5

I agree with previous posters:

  • reissue is pointless as a disambiguation
    • if there is more to say about the reissue use that as a disambiguation, e.g. “special edition”.
    • if not: leave it blank.

One thing I’d like to point out though:

  • as much as it’s meaningless, " reissue" is also harmless as a disambiguation. And from what I’ve learned so far in this community that means:
    • don’t no-vote an edit that adds “reissue” (since it doesn’t change anything for the worse)
    • be friendly when pointing out that it is redundant.
    • if you find such a disambiguation already applied, leave it or replace it with a better one.
7 Likes