"Sir" in artist names

[David K. Gasaway]

In a recent edit of mine(1), KRSCuan questioned whether knighted
artists should have "Sir" in their artist name.  I haven't found
anything in the style guides that addresses this.

Arthur Sullivan is a concrete example.  His artist name in MusicBrainz
is "Sir Arthur Sullivan"(2), and his wikipedia page gives his full name
as "Sir Arthur Seymour Sullivan MVO".  Yet when you click the MVO link,
wikipedia says MVO is 5th grade, not a knight, and not entitled to use
the "Sir" prefix.  On the other hand, John Tavener(3) is a KBE (proper
knight), yet his MusicBrainz artist name is "John Tavener" and "Sir"
only appears in an alias.

In other words, poking around the database isn't really answering the
question either.

(1) http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=11191826
(2) http://musicbrainz.org/artist/4b466f5e-4620-4084-8841-3fe4ea38e689.html
(3) http://musicbrainz.org/artist/7b0a18b7-2b32-4b26-8db3-3ea39a59e1e6.html

_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

[Kuno Woudt-2]

On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 12:57:18AM -0700, David Gasaway wrote:
> In a recent edit of mine(1), KRSCuan questioned whether knighted
> artists should have "Sir" in their artist name.  I haven't found
> anything in the style guides that addresses this.

I think, in general, it is down to what the artist themselves use
most, which is also how a typical user would look for them and how
they would want the name in their mp3 tags.

If a person prefixes his name with 'Sir' on all album covers and
spines, that is what we would should have in the database, regardless
of whether that person is a proper knight.  

-- kuno.


_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

[Brian Schweitzer]

On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 4:19 AM, Kuno Woudt <kuno@...> wrote:

On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 12:57:18AM -0700, David Gasaway wrote:
> In a recent edit of mine(1), KRSCuan questioned whether knighted
> artists should have "Sir" in their artist name.  I haven't found
> anything in the style guides that addresses this.

I think, in general, it is down to what the artist themselves use
most, which is also how a typical user would look for them and how
they would want the name in their mp3 tags.

If a person prefixes his name with 'Sir' on all album covers and
spines, that is what we would should have in the database, regardless
of whether that person is a proper knight.

I would agree in the general sense.  However, some clarity may be in order, with regards to titles in artist names, in general.  There are more than a few Privates, Parsons, Friars, Sergeants, Lieutenants, Generals, Presidents, etc which all, I would suggest, shouldn't have their titles in the artist name listing.

Brian

_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

[monxton-2]

David Gasaway wrote:

> In a recent edit of mine(1), KRSCuan questioned whether knighted
> artists should have "Sir" in their artist name.  I haven't found
> anything in the style guides that addresses this.
>
> Arthur Sullivan is a concrete example.  His artist name in MusicBrainz
> is "Sir Arthur Sullivan"(2), and his wikipedia page gives his full name
> as "Sir Arthur Seymour Sullivan MVO".  Yet when you click the MVO link,
> wikipedia says MVO is 5th grade, not a knight, and not entitled to use
> the "Sir" prefix.  On the other hand, John Tavener(3) is a KBE (proper
> knight), yet his MusicBrainz artist name is "John Tavener" and "Sir"
> only appears in an alias.

Sullivan's knighthood and his MVO were two distinct honours. He wasn't
"Sir" because of the MVO but as well.

One error that many of these knighted artists have is that the sort
order is often wrong, for example:
    Maxwell Davies, Sir Peter
    Olivier, Sir Laurence

Sullivan is correctly:
    Sullivan, Arthur, Sir





_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

[Brian Schweitzer]

I would suggest that Sullivan is correctly Sullivan, Arthur, with no title or honorific included.  The field is for the artist's name; the titles may be interesting to include, but I'd suggest they're annotation fodder for now, though perhaps we could eventually get some sort of a field for storing honorifics in a more database-friendly way.  Just as example, Elton John is a Knight Bachelor; should his listing become "Sir Elton John"?

Including such info only serves, imho, to make the determination of the "best possible real name" more difficult.  Should doctors have MD, or PhD, or JD, etc included?  How about presidents, vice-presidents, generals, privates, corporals, priests, rabbis, wives of knights, etc?  According to the International Society of Knights Bachelor, ( http://www.iskb.co.uk/INFORMATION.htm ) the "Sir" is a form of address, while "Knight" or 'Kt." would be used in a formal document (which is, perhaps, closer to MB's use than "Sir").  So we'd have "Elton John, Knight"...  that just seems like it leads to confusion, without data quality improvement.

Brian

On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:44 AM, monxton <monxton%2Bmusicbrainz@...> wrote:

David Gasaway wrote:
> In a recent edit of mine(1), KRSCuan questioned whether knighted
> artists should have "Sir" in their artist name.  I haven't found
> anything in the style guides that addresses this.
>
> Arthur Sullivan is a concrete example.  His artist name in MusicBrainz
> is "Sir Arthur Sullivan"(2), and his wikipedia page gives his full name
> as "Sir Arthur Seymour Sullivan MVO".  Yet when you click the MVO link,
> wikipedia says MVO is 5th grade, not a knight, and not entitled to use
> the "Sir" prefix.  On the other hand, John Tavener(3) is a KBE (proper
> knight), yet his MusicBrainz artist name is "John Tavener" and "Sir"
> only appears in an alias.

Sullivan's knighthood and his MVO were two distinct honours. He wasn't
"Sir" because of the MVO but as well.

One error that many of these knighted artists have is that the sort
order is often wrong, for example:
   Maxwell Davies, Sir Peter
   Olivier, Sir Laurence

Sullivan is correctly:
   Sullivan, Arthur, Sir

_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

[Paul C. Bryan]

I'd suggest that if a title or honorific is typically included in the
artist's name (e.g. Dr. Lonnie Smith) it should be retained in the
artist's name in MusicBrainz. I agree that it shouldn't be added merely
because some title was bestowed upon them.

On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 14:48 -0400, Brian Schweitzer wrote:

> I would suggest that Sullivan is correctly Sullivan, Arthur, with no
> title or honorific included.  The field is for the artist's name; the
> titles may be interesting to include, but I'd suggest they're
> annotation fodder for now, though perhaps we could eventually get some
> sort of a field for storing honorifics in a more database-friendly
> way.  Just as example, Elton John is a Knight Bachelor; should his
> listing become "Sir Elton John"?
>
> Including such info only serves, imho, to make the determination of
> the "best possible real name" more difficult.  Should doctors have MD,
> or PhD, or JD, etc included?  How about presidents, vice-presidents,
> generals, privates, corporals, priests, rabbis, wives of knights, etc?
> According to the International Society of Knights Bachelor,
> ( http://www.iskb.co.uk/INFORMATION.htm ) the "Sir" is a form of
> address, while "Knight" or 'Kt." would be used in a formal document
> (which is, perhaps, closer to MB's use than "Sir").  So we'd have
> "Elton John, Knight"...  that just seems like it leads to confusion,
> without data quality improvement.
>
> Brian
>
> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 10:44 AM, monxton <monxton
> +musicbrainz@...> wrote:
>         David Gasaway wrote:
>         > In a recent edit of mine(1), KRSCuan questioned whether
>         knighted
>         > artists should have "Sir" in their artist name.  I haven't
>         found
>         > anything in the style guides that addresses this.
>         >
>         > Arthur Sullivan is a concrete example.  His artist name in
>         MusicBrainz
>         > is "Sir Arthur Sullivan"(2), and his wikipedia page gives
>         his full name
>         > as "Sir Arthur Seymour Sullivan MVO".  Yet when you click
>         the MVO link,
>         > wikipedia says MVO is 5th grade, not a knight, and not
>         entitled to use
>         > the "Sir" prefix.  On the other hand, John Tavener(3) is a
>         KBE (proper
>         > knight), yet his MusicBrainz artist name is "John Tavener"
>         and "Sir"
>         > only appears in an alias.
>        
>        
>         Sullivan's knighthood and his MVO were two distinct honours.
>         He wasn't
>         "Sir" because of the MVO but as well.
>        
>         One error that many of these knighted artists have is that the
>         sort
>         order is often wrong, for example:
>            Maxwell Davies, Sir Peter
>            Olivier, Sir Laurence
>        
>         Sullivan is correctly:
>            Sullivan, Arthur, Sir
>        
>        
>        
>        
>        
>        
>         _______________________________________________
>         Musicbrainz-style mailing list
>         Musicbrainz-style@...
>         http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
>        
>
> _______________________________________________
> Musicbrainz-style mailing list
> Musicbrainz-style@...
> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style

[chabreyflint]

I just realized a newbie without being noticed recently changed "Shirley Bassey" into "Dame Shirley Bassey", ( http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=11227059 ) arguing that she uses the "Dame" on the most recent releases. This looks more than odd to me on the dozens of early releases and the hundreds of tracks she released before being (how do you call this?) knighted? I feel like this should be reverted (or at least discussed). Since no alias was added (the only existing alias being "Dame Shirley Bassey"!) a new artist "Shirley Bassey" was created, which is now up to be merged ( http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=11528485 ).

Paul C. Bryan wrote:

I'd suggest that if a title or honorific is typically included in the
artist's name (e.g. Dr. Lonnie Smith) it should be retained in the
artist's name in MusicBrainz. I agree that it shouldn't be added merely
because some title was bestowed upon them.

On Tue, 2009-10-27 at 14:48 -0400, Brian Schweitzer wrote:
> I would suggest that Sullivan is correctly Sullivan, Arthur, with no
> title or honorific included.  The field is for the artist's name; the
> titles may be interesting to include, but I'd suggest they're
> annotation fodder for now, though perhaps we could eventually get some
> sort of a field for storing honorifics in a more database-friendly
> way.  Just as example, Elton John is a Knight Bachelor; should his
> listing become "Sir Elton John"?
>
> Including such info only serves, imho, to make the determination of
> the "best possible real name" more difficult.  Should doctors have MD,
> or PhD, or JD, etc included?  How about presidents, vice-presidents,
> generals, privates, corporals, priests, rabbis, wives of knights, etc?
> According to the International Society of Knights Bachelor,
> ( http://www.iskb.co.uk/INFORMATION.htm ) the "Sir" is a form of
> address, while "Knight" or 'Kt." would be used in a formal document
> (which is, perhaps, closer to MB's use than "Sir").  So we'd have
> "Elton John, Knight"...  that just seems like it leads to confusion,
> without data quality improvement.
>
> Brian