Nabble - Musicbrainz - Style

Re: Post NGS Style Guidelines, Titles

2009-12-08T13:21:47Z

On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 12:27:47PM -0800, neothe0ne wrote:
> There are mistakes in the examples on the NGS Title styles page (
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:kuno/Style/Titles).
>
> Take "FINAL FANTASY CRYSTAL CHRONICLES: Rings of Fate" as an example (
> http://vgmdb.net/album/4583). Nowhere are Final Fantasy and Crystal
> Chronicles written on different lines, on either the cover, back, or discs.

Thank you for spotting that, I've changed the Titles page to match the
cover.

> I'd argue for removing that example, as it does not hold up.

I think it's still a pretty good example, it now illustrates that
something can even be a subtitle when there are no seperators on the
cover.

But I mostly wanted it to capture the different line == subtitle idea,
which is still there now. I'm considering removing the Drunken Tiger
one, as it doesn't really add much and is fairly obscure.

If you have interesting examples which could be included on the page,
or which would illustrate certain guidelines better, please send them
to me and I will consider including them or replacing one of the
existing examples with them.

-- kuno / warp.

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

Re: Post NGS Style Guidelines, Titles

2009-12-08T12:27:47Z

There are mistakes in the examples on the NGS Title styles page (http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:kuno/Style/Titles).

Take "FINAL FANTASY CRYSTAL CHRONICLES: Rings of Fate" as an example (http://vgmdb.net/album/4583). Nowhere are Final Fantasy and Crystal Chronicles written on different lines, on either the cover, back, or discs.

I'd argue for removing that example, as it does not hold up.

-neo

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

Relaunching the CotM: Bach box sets and the Unlinked discs report

2009-12-08T02:24:35Z

Hey everyone,

I've had enough emails of support for the idea that I'm going to try to relaunch the Cleanup of the Month project starting this month. I ran these two cleanups through IRC yesterday and noone objected, so I've gone ahead and cleaned up the CotM page, and created new pages, to bring it up to date. http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Cleanup_Of_The_Month

For December 2009 and January 2010, two different CotM running at the same time, since each interests different groups of editors.

One will be working to clean out the unlinked discs report - half by the end of December, and the entire thing by the end of January. http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Cleanup_Of_The_Month/Unlinked_Discs_Report

The other will be working to finish the CSG Standard works list for JS Bach ( http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/CSG_Standard/JS_Bach ) and get the various big Bach box (yes, I can hear people groaning at the one...) sets cleaned up and fully entered. http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Cleanup_Of_The_Month/BachBoxSets

Hopefully, we can get enough attention to these two projects that we can get some good solid work done, some good community building, and have some fun at the same time.

Going forward, the various artists who had been proposed for CotM 2+ years ago are listed in http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Talk:Cleanup_Of_The_Month . They may or may not still need clean up (or even be valid, in case case of ones like the Bollywood SPA). If anyone has ideas for February CotM and beyond, please add them to the list!

Thanks in advance to all who take the time to toss in even a few edits for either effort!

Brian

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

Re: Post NGS Style Guidelines, Titles

2009-12-08T01:02:24Z

2009/12/8 Kuno Woudt <kuno@...>

On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 09:33:26PM +0100, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
>
> A theoretical question: I always felt that our using standard punctuation
> for non-standard meanings was a problem, because it made it difficult to
> distinguish between signs which were actually in the title and signs which
> were added to comply with a Style Guide. So I suggest using non-standard
> signs for example doubling them. I understand that this would be completely
> different from current style guides, but since many things are going to
> change, now is the best time to do it.

This would change the guideline, which is not something I am going to
do as part of this project. Definitely outside the scope.

Obviously you are free to discuss this seperately and propose a change
via the regular RFC/RFV process.

You are right, this would be a separate thread.

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

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

Re: Post NGS Style Guidelines, Titles

2009-12-08T00:51:19Z

On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 11:30:48PM +0100, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
> What about using kuno's suggestion of using the colon to indicate line
> breaks (I don't remember seing this anywhere before, but why not?),

That is from http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/SubTitleStyle .

-- kuno.

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

Re: Post NGS Style Guidelines, Titles

2009-12-08T00:48:00Z

On Mon, Dec 07, 2009 at 09:33:26PM +0100, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
>
> A theoretical question: I always felt that our using standard punctuation
> for non-standard meanings was a problem, because it made it difficult to
> distinguish between signs which were actually in the title and signs which
> were added to comply with a Style Guide. So I suggest using non-standard
> signs for example doubling them. I understand that this would be completely
> different from current style guides, but since many things are going to
> change, now is the best time to do it.

This would change the guideline, which is not something I am going to
do as part of this project. Definitely outside the scope.

Obviously you are free to discuss this seperately and propose a change
via the regular RFC/RFV process.

-- kuno / warp.

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

Re: Post NGS Style Guidelines, Titles

2009-12-08T00:30:03Z

2009/12/8 Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...>

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Kuno Woudt <kuno@...> wrote:

Hello members of the StyleCouncil!

The first version of the Titles page for the Post NGS Style Guidelines
is done. Please have a look and send me your feedback (feel free to
reply here on mb-devel, edit the discussion page on the wiki, or poke
me on IRC).

A quick summary for those not familiar with my efforts:

I intend to rewrite and restructure all of the guidelines for the NGS
server release. I am not changing any guidelines, but I am trimming
the fat, so please let me know if I left out any important details
from the original pages.

This particular page, Titles, is intended to replace all of the
following wiki pages we currently have as Official Guidelines:

MainTitle, VolumeNumberStyle, PartNumberStyle, SeriesNumberStyle,
SubTitle, SubTitleStyle, MultipleTitleStyle, SplitReleaseTitleStyle,
AbbreviationStyle, FeaturingArtistStyle, ExtraTitleInformation.

The accompanying Titles/Exceptions page is intended to replace
SeriesStyleGuideline.

links:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:kuno/Style/Titles
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:kuno/Post_NGS_Style

-- kuno.

ps. Many thanks to Nikki for already providing lots of valuable
feedback.

I've tried to go through the proposal, plus all the applicable (and potentially additionally applicable) pages and guidelines. My comments are in http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User_talk:kuno/Style/Titles . Also, I'd just suggest the page be viewed not with just an eye towards releases and tracks (or "songs" as they're called in the proposed page - terminology problem...), but also works, plus any other potential element-type we may have in the future with a "title" aspect.

I wonder: did I misunderstand or will NGS allow users to enter the titles more or less as printed AND link to a MB Work? If so, I guess we could use different Style Guides for track and release titles (in order to preserve as much as desirable the printed version) and for the MB Works where we could aim to a more standardized scheme.

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

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

Re: Post NGS Style Guidelines, Titles

2009-12-07T18:24:52Z

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Kuno Woudt <kuno@...> wrote:

Hello members of the StyleCouncil!

The first version of the Titles page for the Post NGS Style Guidelines
is done. Please have a look and send me your feedback (feel free to
reply here on mb-devel, edit the discussion page on the wiki, or poke
me on IRC).

A quick summary for those not familiar with my efforts:

I intend to rewrite and restructure all of the guidelines for the NGS
server release. I am not changing any guidelines, but I am trimming
the fat, so please let me know if I left out any important details
from the original pages.

This particular page, Titles, is intended to replace all of the
following wiki pages we currently have as Official Guidelines:

MainTitle, VolumeNumberStyle, PartNumberStyle, SeriesNumberStyle,
SubTitle, SubTitleStyle, MultipleTitleStyle, SplitReleaseTitleStyle,
AbbreviationStyle, FeaturingArtistStyle, ExtraTitleInformation.

The accompanying Titles/Exceptions page is intended to replace
SeriesStyleGuideline.

links:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:kuno/Style/Titles
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:kuno/Post_NGS_Style

-- kuno.

ps. Many thanks to Nikki for already providing lots of valuable
feedback.

I've tried to go through the proposal, plus all the applicable (and potentially additionally applicable) pages and guidelines. My comments are in http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User_talk:kuno/Style/Titles . Also, I'd just suggest the page be viewed not with just an eye towards releases and tracks (or "songs" as they're called in the proposed page - terminology problem...), but also works, plus any other potential element-type we may have in the future with a "title" aspect.

Brian

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

Re: Post NGS Style Guidelines, Titles

2009-12-07T14:30:48Z

What about using kuno's suggestion of using the colon to indicate line breaks (I don't remember seing this anywhere before, but why not?),
what about the slash (yes it is often used to mean exactly what MB uses it for, but it may be used for something else...)
what about the brackets
what about the comma...

The "problem" is that when we see a title in MB, it isn't obvious to know if the colon/slash/brackets/comma... were added to follow a style guide or if they were originally in the title. Are they ArtistIntent or MBIntent? I think we would make the problem less frequent (although we could never eradicate it entirely) by using non-standard variations.

Also, if I understood correctly, NGS should allow us to have both the "as printed" and the "standardized" version of titles, so my suggestion may be completely irrelevant. But if it is indeed useful, I think now is the time to set it up.

2009/12/7 Philipp Wolfer <ph.wolfer@...>

do you have an example od what you mean with non-standard meaning. I neither think we used standard puntuation for non-standard meaning, nor do i think we should use non-standard punctuation.

Phil

7. Dez 2009 9:34 nachm. schrieb am "Frederic Da Vitoria" <davitofrg@...>:

2009/12/7 Kuno Woudt <kuno@...>
> > > Hello members of the StyleCouncil! > > The first version of the Titles page for the Post NGS ...

A theoretical question: I always felt that our using standard punctuation for non-standard meanings was a problem, because it made it difficult to distinguish between signs which were actually in the title and signs which were added to comply with a Style Guide. So I suggest using non-standard signs for example doubling them. I understand that this would be completely different from current style guides, but since many things are going to change, now is the best time to do it.

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

_______________________________________________
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

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

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

Re: RFC: SPAs cleanup (attempt 2)

2009-12-07T14:26:52Z

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Aurélien Mino <a.mino@...> wrote:

Some comments on the documentation.

On 04/12/2009 21:20, Brian Schweitzer wrote:
> > Ok. I believe this RFC (and the RFV as well, of course) should be
> further split in pre-NGS and post-NGS, because I don't think
> > it would be a good idea to have people vote (or rather not-veto ;-)
> ) something which will not happen before probably a few
> > months. The situation may have slightly changed then so that maybe
> someone will want some time before applying the final
> > merge.
>
> Seems reasonable. Ok, how's this sound?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This is RFC #1; this first RFC will go to RFV on Fri Dec 11 at 4 pm
> EST unless there's a need for further revision:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> This is a proposal to clean up all the Special Purpose Artists and
> their associated wiki pages.
>
> Replace http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist with
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/BrianFreud/Special_Purpose_Artist .

I don't think that the section "Tracks assigned to Various Artists"
should be included in the same page as the guideline.
It serves a different purpose, and may be frequently updated, so it's
best to put it on its own page.

Makes sense, though I don't know that it really needs its own page. Perhaps a subsection on the discussion page would be sufficient?

>
> The following stub-type wiki pages would be changed to be simple
> redirects to http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist :
> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist
> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist_Style

Please report all key information to the new Special Purpose Artist page
before doing the redirect.
E.g. the SPA page misses the example of bird songs.

I incorporated any info which didn't seem redundant. Isn't the vague "This is appropriate for things like bird songs, etc." covered adequately already by "There is no artist." without adding additional text for people to wade through?

> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Data_Track

While this page is a stub, it's not about the "Data Track" artist but
about the definition of a data track (besides the other Hidden Track page).
You probably mean: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Data_Track_Artist

No, I actually meant http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Data_Track_Artist - that's also the page that is currently linked to from http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist . I wasn't even aware of http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Data_Track_Artist , but that one would be even more redundant after this cleanup; I'd suggest adding http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Data_Track_Artist to the list of redirected pages. As for the text in http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Data_Track , that other 95% you're talking about isn't actually about the definition of a data track, but rather, is a vague and incomplete list of various terms that may, or may not, indicate a data track. The conclusion of that section would seem to indicate what should be (or already has been done, for most of them) done with that section: "These should all be added as aliases of the SpecialPurposeArtist [data track] (which should be used for data tracks on VariousArtists albums)." - ie, there's no reason it needs to be, or should be, in the guideline itself.

Brian

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

Re: RFC: SPAs cleanup (attempt 2)

2009-12-07T14:16:11Z

Some comments on the documentation.

On 04/12/2009 21:20, Brian Schweitzer wrote:

> > Ok. I believe this RFC (and the RFV as well, of course) should be
> further split in pre-NGS and post-NGS, because I don't think
> > it would be a good idea to have people vote (or rather not-veto ;-)
> ) something which will not happen before probably a few
> > months. The situation may have slightly changed then so that maybe
> someone will want some time before applying the final
> > merge.
>
> Seems reasonable. Ok, how's this sound?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This is RFC #1; this first RFC will go to RFV on Fri Dec 11 at 4 pm
> EST unless there's a need for further revision:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> This is a proposal to clean up all the Special Purpose Artists and
> their associated wiki pages.
>
> Replace http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist with
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/BrianFreud/Special_Purpose_Artist .

I don't think that the section "Tracks assigned to Various Artists"
should be included in the same page as the guideline.
It serves a different purpose, and may be frequently updated, so it's
best to put it on its own page.
>
> The following stub-type wiki pages would be changed to be simple
> redirects to http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist :
> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist
> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist_Style
Please report all key information to the new Special Purpose Artist page
before doing the redirect.
E.g. the SPA page misses the example of bird songs.
> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Data_Track
While this page is a stub, it's not about the "Data Track" artist but
about the definition of a data track (besides the other Hidden Track page).
You probably mean: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Data_Track_Artist
> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Various_Artists
> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Unknown_Artist
> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Disney

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

Re: Post NGS Style Guidelines, Titles

2009-12-07T14:12:43Z

do you have an example od what you mean with non-standard meaning. I neither think we used standard puntuation for non-standard meaning, nor do i think we should use non-standard punctuation.

Phil

7. Dez 2009 9:34 nachm. schrieb am "Frederic Da Vitoria" <davitofrg@...>:

2009/12/7 Kuno Woudt <kuno@...>
> > > Hello members of the StyleCouncil! > > The first version of the Titles page for the Post NGS ...

A theoretical question: I always felt that our using standard punctuation for non-standard meanings was a problem, because it made it difficult to distinguish between signs which were actually in the title and signs which were added to comply with a Style Guide. So I suggest using non-standard signs for example doubling them. I understand that this would be completely different from current style guides, but since many things are going to change, now is the best time to do it.

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

_______________________________________________
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

Re: Post NGS Style Guidelines, Titles

2009-12-07T12:33:26Z

2009/12/7 Kuno Woudt <kuno@...>

Hello members of the StyleCouncil!

The first version of the Titles page for the Post NGS Style Guidelines
is done. Please have a look and send me your feedback (feel free to
reply here on mb-devel, edit the discussion page on the wiki, or poke
me on IRC).

A quick summary for those not familiar with my efforts:

I intend to rewrite and restructure all of the guidelines for the NGS
server release. I am not changing any guidelines, but I am trimming
the fat, so please let me know if I left out any important details
from the original pages.

This particular page, Titles, is intended to replace all of the
following wiki pages we currently have as Official Guidelines:

MainTitle, VolumeNumberStyle, PartNumberStyle, SeriesNumberStyle,
SubTitle, SubTitleStyle, MultipleTitleStyle, SplitReleaseTitleStyle,
AbbreviationStyle, FeaturingArtistStyle, ExtraTitleInformation.

The accompanying Titles/Exceptions page is intended to replace
SeriesStyleGuideline.

links:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:kuno/Style/Titles
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:kuno/Post_NGS_Style

-- kuno.

ps. Many thanks to Nikki for already providing lots of valuable
feedback.

A theoretical question: I always felt that our using standard punctuation for non-standard meanings was a problem, because it made it difficult to distinguish between signs which were actually in the title and signs which were added to comply with a Style Guide. So I suggest using non-standard signs for example doubling them. I understand that this would be completely different from current style guides, but since many things are going to change, now is the best time to do it.

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

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

Post NGS Style Guidelines, Titles

2009-12-07T12:01:38Z

Hello members of the StyleCouncil!

The first version of the Titles page for the Post NGS Style Guidelines
is done. Please have a look and send me your feedback (feel free to
reply here on mb-devel, edit the discussion page on the wiki, or poke
me on IRC).

A quick summary for those not familiar with my efforts:

I intend to rewrite and restructure all of the guidelines for the NGS
server release. I am not changing any guidelines, but I am trimming
the fat, so please let me know if I left out any important details
from the original pages.

This particular page, Titles, is intended to replace all of the
following wiki pages we currently have as Official Guidelines:

MainTitle, VolumeNumberStyle, PartNumberStyle, SeriesNumberStyle,
SubTitle, SubTitleStyle, MultipleTitleStyle, SplitReleaseTitleStyle,
AbbreviationStyle, FeaturingArtistStyle, ExtraTitleInformation.

The accompanying Titles/Exceptions page is intended to replace
SeriesStyleGuideline.

links:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:kuno/Style/Titles
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:kuno/Post_NGS_Style

-- kuno.

ps. Many thanks to Nikki for already providing lots of valuable
feedback.

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

Re: RFC: SPAs cleanup (attempt 2)

2009-12-06T00:40:39Z

Hello Brian,

On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 03:20:47PM -0500, Brian Schweitzer wrote:

>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This is RFC #1; this first RFC will go to RFV on Fri Dec 11 at 4 pm EST
> unless there's a need for further revision:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> This is a proposal to clean up all the Special Purpose Artists and their
> associated wiki pages.
>
> Replace http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist with
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/BrianFreud/Special_Purpose_Artist .

I have added some comments to the discussion page on mediawiki. They're not about the
guideline itself, but about how it is presented.

-- kuno.

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

Re: RFC: Modify edit conditions for destructive edits

2009-12-05T17:38:29Z

Relationship attributes and types can only be edited by relationship
editors, so they should probably just be auto-edits.

I was with you until here. Relationship editors, however, edit the types of relationship entities, and their attributes, not the relationships created using those entities... Nothing here proposed changing anything with regards to the (mostly) behind-the-scenes tasks done by relationship editors. What *is* proposed is a change regarding remove relationship *edits*.

Aliases are effectively just search hints. A remove edit will contain
all the information you need to restore the alias if need be and aliases
don't have MBIDs, so I would leave those alone.

Just because it's easier to re-add them doesn't make it a good idea to make it this simple to remove them. Who checks remove alias edits? I know it's not in any of my saved "destructive things to look for" edit searches. I guess my question would be, ok, it's easy to readd them, based solely on the info given in the remove edit, but if we're going to change the others, what reason is there to not change these as well? (ie, Is there a proactive reason it should be easy to remove aliases?)

PUIDs and disc IDs are, like was already said, difficult to verify (and
if you have the remove edit, the info is there to re-add it). I'm
leaning towards not making them harder to remove and instead working out
how to automatically add a note to the original add edit so that the

PUIDs, perhaps, and I agree with your reasoning there. However, I think most remove DiscID edits are by people removing homebrews, not people removing invalid DiscIDs. (Actually, I think I've seen more incorrect edits trying to remove a DiscID "because my copy has 17 tracks, and this Disc ID only has 16, so the editor's not letting me add that 'missing' track to the release" than valid "removing an incorrect DiscID" edits...)

Brian

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

Re: RFC: Modify edit conditions for destructive edits

2009-12-05T04:14:52Z

Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> I'm not sure if we should treat them all equally.

This is basically what I was thinking.

I don't think we should just make it harder to make any removal edit
because they differ so much in how much data they affect. I definitely
agree with making it harder to remove a release (Remove Release, Remove
Releases), because a lot of data can be attached to a release. Tracks as
well can have quite a bit of data and also have an MBID so I'd probably
agree with doing the same for the Remove Track edit too.

Artists, labels and release groups have to empty before they can be
removed, so I would really disagree with making those harder to remove
since you first have to remove everything from them beforehand anyway.
ModBot also deletes an empty artist before a non-auto-editor's edit can
pass in most cases too, so making that particular one harder is silly.

Relationship attributes and types can only be edited by relationship
editors, so they should probably just be auto-edits.

Aliases are effectively just search hints. A remove edit will contain
all the information you need to restore the alias if need be and aliases
don't have MBIDs, so I would leave those alone.

PUIDs and disc IDs are, like was already said, difficult to verify (and
if you have the remove edit, the info is there to re-add it). I'm
leaning towards not making them harder to remove and instead working out
how to automatically add a note to the original add edit so that the
person who actually added the PUID/disc ID gets notified (since they're
one of the few people in a position to actually verify the edit). I
think the same might also apply to ISRCs, since there aren't many
publicly searchable databases.

I'm not really sure about release events or relationships. I guess at
the moment I don't really mind either way.

Nikki

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

Re: RFC: SPAs cleanup (attempt 2)

2009-12-04T14:01:25Z

2009/12/4 Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...>

> Ok. I believe this RFC (and the RFV as well, of course) should be further split in pre-NGS and post-NGS, because I don't think
> it would be a good idea to have people vote (or rather not-veto ;-) ) something which will not happen before probably a few
> months. The situation may have slightly changed then so that maybe someone will want some time before applying the final
> merge.

Seems reasonable. Ok, how's this sound?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is RFC #1; this first RFC will go to RFV on Fri Dec 11 at 4 pm EST unless there's a need for further revision:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a proposal to clean up all the Special Purpose Artists and their associated wiki pages.

Replace http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist with http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/BrianFreud/Special_Purpose_Artist .

The following stub-type wiki pages would be changed to be simple redirects to http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist :
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist_Style
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Data_Track
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Various_Artists
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Unknown_Artist
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Disney

Renames:
    * Rename "[data track]" to "[data]".
    * Rename "Classical" to "[classical music]".
    * Rename "[musical]" to "[musical theater]".
    * Rename "Disney" to "[Disney]".
    * Rename "[language courses]" into "[language instruction]".
    * Rename "[gregorian chant]" to "[religious music]".

Merges:
    * Merge "Data CD" into "[data]".
    * Merge "[east african music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Ethnic Music Compilations" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Orchestra" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[traditional]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[islamic chant]" into "[religious music]".
    * Merge "[spiritual]" into "[religious music]".
    * Merge "Musical" into "[musical theater]".
    * Merge "Bollywood" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "Soundtrack" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "Kimagure Orange Road" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "[television theme songs]" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "Alan Lomax Collection, The" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Allegro Corporation" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation)" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "BBC Radio Collection" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "(The) Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Dancelife" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "ESPN" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Hollywood Edge" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "LaserLight Digital" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Lifescapes" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Linguaphone" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Living Language" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Looney Tunes" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Pamplin Music" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Pickin' On" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Scary Sounds" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "(The) Smithsonian Collection" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Vineyard Music" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Warner Classics" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Wordsound" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "3D Realms" into "[unknown]".

"Ella Fitzgerald & Chick Webb" and "Cenaclul Flacăra" would be accepted as SPAs, but ignored from documentation, as they're rare cat-corner cases with good reason to exist.

"[gregorian chant] & Antonio de Cabezón", "[gregorian chant] & Francisco Guerrero", "[gregorian chant] & Francisco Guerrero & Bricio Gaudi", and "[gregorian chant] & Philippe Rogier" would be ignored, as they'll disappear with NGS anyhow.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is RFC #2; this RFC I'll keep open until NGS goes live, at which time I'll resend it and we can set a RFV date.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Merge:
    * Merge "Capcom" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "KONAMI" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Namco" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Nintendo" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Sega" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[Christmas music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[Church Chimes]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[classical music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[Disney]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[language instruction]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[musical theater]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[nature sounds]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[news report]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[religious music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[soundtrack]" into "[unknown]".

Re: RFC #2, between now and NGS, if anyone finds any other label-as-artist-type SPAs, or any other SPAs I've still not managed to spot, please drop me an email so they can possibly be added to RFC #2 (or, if there's no need for them to wait for NGS, we could possibly have a RFC 1.5 between now and then to clean those up / incorporate them as well.) :)

Re: RFC #2, per nikki's concerns, in the unlikely case that between now and NGS any of the part 2 list's artists should somehow be converted from an SPA into a real artist (ex: the "Sega" SPA gets cleaned up and at the time of NGS actually represents a group named "Sega"), those would of course be removed from list #2, and no longer would be part of RFC #2 when it's re-sent in a few months.

It's shorter, so we should be able to reach a consensus more easily ;-)

No comment from me, BTW

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

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

RFC: SPAs cleanup (attempt 2)

2009-12-04T12:20:47Z

> Ok. I believe this RFC (and the RFV as well, of course) should be further split in pre-NGS and post-NGS, because I don't think
> it would be a good idea to have people vote (or rather not-veto ;-) ) something which will not happen before probably a few
> months. The situation may have slightly changed then so that maybe someone will want some time before applying the final
> merge.

Seems reasonable. Ok, how's this sound?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is RFC #1; this first RFC will go to RFV on Fri Dec 11 at 4 pm EST unless there's a need for further revision:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is a proposal to clean up all the Special Purpose Artists and their associated wiki pages.

Replace http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist with http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/BrianFreud/Special_Purpose_Artist .

The following stub-type wiki pages would be changed to be simple redirects to http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist :
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist_Style
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Data_Track
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Various_Artists
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Unknown_Artist
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Disney

Renames:
    * Rename "[data track]" to "[data]".
    * Rename "Classical" to "[classical music]".
    * Rename "[musical]" to "[musical theater]".
    * Rename "Disney" to "[Disney]".
    * Rename "[language courses]" into "[language instruction]".
    * Rename "[gregorian chant]" to "[religious music]".

Merges:
    * Merge "Data CD" into "[data]".
    * Merge "[east african music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Ethnic Music Compilations" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Orchestra" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[traditional]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[islamic chant]" into "[religious music]".
    * Merge "[spiritual]" into "[religious music]".
    * Merge "Musical" into "[musical theater]".
    * Merge "Bollywood" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "Soundtrack" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "Kimagure Orange Road" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "[television theme songs]" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "Alan Lomax Collection, The" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Allegro Corporation" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation)" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "BBC Radio Collection" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "(The) Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Dancelife" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "ESPN" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Hollywood Edge" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "LaserLight Digital" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Lifescapes" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Linguaphone" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Living Language" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Looney Tunes" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Pamplin Music" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Pickin' On" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Scary Sounds" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "(The) Smithsonian Collection" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Vineyard Music" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Warner Classics" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Wordsound" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "3D Realms" into "[unknown]".

"Ella Fitzgerald & Chick Webb" and "Cenaclul Flacăra" would be accepted as SPAs, but ignored from documentation, as they're rare cat-corner cases with good reason to exist.

"[gregorian chant] & Antonio de Cabezón", "[gregorian chant] & Francisco Guerrero", "[gregorian chant] & Francisco Guerrero & Bricio Gaudi", and "[gregorian chant] & Philippe Rogier" would be ignored, as they'll disappear with NGS anyhow.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is RFC #2; this RFC I'll keep open until NGS goes live, at which time I'll resend it and we can set a RFV date.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Merge:
    * Merge "Capcom" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "KONAMI" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Namco" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Nintendo" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Sega" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[Christmas music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[Church Chimes]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[classical music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[Disney]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[language instruction]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[musical theater]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[nature sounds]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[news report]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[religious music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[soundtrack]" into "[unknown]".

Re: RFC #2, between now and NGS, if anyone finds any other label-as-artist-type SPAs, or any other SPAs I've still not managed to spot, please drop me an email so they can possibly be added to RFC #2 (or, if there's no need for them to wait for NGS, we could possibly have a RFC 1.5 between now and then to clean those up / incorporate them as well.) :)

Re: RFC #2, per nikki's concerns, in the unlikely case that between now and NGS any of the part 2 list's artists should somehow be converted from an SPA into a real artist (ex: the "Sega" SPA gets cleaned up and at the time of NGS actually represents a group named "Sega"), those would of course be removed from list #2, and no longer would be part of RFC #2 when it's re-sent in a few months.

Brian

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

Re: RFV: SPAs cleanup

2009-12-04T04:07:54Z

2009/12/2 Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...>

On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria <davitofrg@...> wrote:

2009/12/2 Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...>

included in your RFC either. For example, in your RFC, you said to leave
[Christmas music] alone, now you're saying to merge it after NGS. In
your RFC you never mentioned Linguaphone, now you're saying to merge it
into [unknown] (and I'd disagree with that anyway, since those are
language courses).

I still disagree with renaming the language courses one (like I
mentioned to you a while back on IRC) because it sounds really formal
and rather unnatural to me. All the libraries I've been to call that
section "language courses" (bookshops just have them in the "languages"

In my opinion, it's too generic. A Teaching Company lecture on, for example, "The History of the English Language" would seem to fit much better into [language courses] than [language instruction], though it's not a "learn to speak a language" course (which was the intent of that SPA, if I follow what you intended when you created that SPA).

section) and I don't see the problem with that name. I'm also not sure
about merging it into [no artist] after NGS so I'd rather that one was
left out for now - we really need a proper discussion about what exactly
we should do with language courses anyway. In fact, I'd actually prefer
if we left the final decision about all the post-NGS merges until NGS is
actually ready to be released. We don't know when that will be nor what
will happen in the meantime. It's not like it would change anything at
the moment anyway and it would have the benefit of making your RFC a bit
shorter and easier to deal with.

This is the only bit I really wold disagree with here. Artist credits are a core component of the NGS release. The concept is pretty clear, and that code's been solid for a good months. It's pretty unlikely that it'll either be dropped or changed in any significant manner. The only reason to even use it here would be to retain potentially useful "unknown-identifier-helper' data, until those can be better identified.

To answer Frederick and Warp on this same general topic:

(warp)

> I expect none of these have Konami or Namco or whatever as a track or
> release artist on the cover, so keeping them as artist credit while
> having it point the mbid to [unknown] doesn't really help either.

(Frederick)

> - why merge Disney to [Disney], then [Disney] to unknown (why 2 steps)
> - if it is wise to merge [Disney] to [unknown]
> - same for [gregorian chant] -> [religious music] -> [unknown]
> And more widely, merging all this, aren't we losing some piece of very valuable information? I agree using SPAs is not the best > way to record this information, but still...

Well, the SPAs the above reference, from this proposal, are Capcom, KONAMI, Namco, Nintendo, Sega, Disney, and [gregorian chant]. All but the last are old "label as artists" that never have been entirely cleaned up. Not one of those 6 is a valid "true" artist identification. That info is perhaps a little useful inidentifying the correct true artist, hence moving it to an AC, while showing the track/release is nothing more, really, than [unknown] (hence resolving to that mbid). Moving Disney to [Disney] would be in keeping with using brackets for any SPA name.

As for [gregorian chant], esp given all the already-accomplished chant merges into that SPA, it no longer actually contains just gregorian chants. It's become a catchall for almost every type of chant, plus other assorted religeous music. Hence renaming it for now, to reflect it's true nature ("[religious music]"), then under NGS, just as with the above 6, merging it to [unknown], but retaining that identity (via the AC) as "religious music", in hopes it can perhaps help to identify those tracks, so they can either be assigned to the correct artist, or [anonymous], whichever would be relevant to the particular track or release.

I realise that I wasn't thinking correctly. I thought that SPAs were used as a way to indicate the type of music, something like folksonomy. This may actually be how it was used, but of course this was completely wrong, technically speaking.

So now I am thinking correctly (well, I think I am :-) ). I think the real issue is: could any of those releases be linked to a real Artist, and if so would your changes make it more difficult? I believe the answer is yes. Of course, changes such as Disney -> [Disney] are without consequence (apart from making things more clear). [gregorian chant] -> [religious music] only reflects the actual situation, so I believe it is correct too. But the last step merging everything to [unknown] without at least ensuring that the old SPA is copied to the annotation seems dangerous to me.

I think we're on the same page now. :) It's actually the exact situation you describe above which is why I'd suggested a 2 stage merge; the first (the ones to do now) would be the merges/renames where there's no potentially useful data to be lost. The second, the one being saved for post-NGS, would be specifically to preserve that data we're now both talking about. We could put it into annotations, but that's a slow and labor intensive process, not to mention that very few people ever actually look at track annotations. My thought was to instead take advantage of artist credits, being introduced in NGS, to store that data.

AC's would normally be something like (to use a case which will be familiar to most, though I doubt this particular one would ever pass a vote), Track X with AC of AFX, and AFX being an AC for Aphex Twin. Here the same would be done - track X would (post-merge) have AC of "[religeous music]", but the "[religeous music]" would be moved to be an AC of "[unknown]", rather than remain an AC of a separate "[religeous music]" artist. (I hope that made sense?)

Gregorian chant is for me a special case (other types of religious music might be similar, but gregorian is the only one about which I know a little history). I feel a true SPA for it would make sense, that it is very close to the MB concept of Artist. So that at some step, I think that recreating a [gregorian chant] with a clean and correct list would be a good idea.

Perhaps, but I think the whole chant SPA artist concept needs some thought. Gregorian, et al, where no composer is identifiable, might make more sense, long term, as an AC of the "[anonymous]" SPA, rather than existing as separate and distinct SPAs. On the other hand, not to get too far from this RFC (which does *not* include this bit here! :D) no matter the type of chant, where no composer is knowable, "[anonymous]" really is the correct SPA artist, even without AC... "gregorian chant" would seem far more a genre than even a distinct AC of "[anonymous]". Any exception to make it somehow any other type of distinction would invariably eventually lead to the same "all sorts of chant ACs" problem we currently had/have with regards to all the chant SPAs.

Ok. I believe this RFC (and the RFV as well, of course) should be further split in pre-NGS and post-NGS, because I don't think it would be a good idea to have people vote (or rather not-veto ;-) ) something which will not happen before probably a few months. The situation may have slightly changed then so that maybe someone will want some time before applying the final merge.

Although if nobody reacts at the already "destructive" merges which this RFC plans before NGS, I guess nobody will care about phase 2 either ;-)

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

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

Folksonimc tags in SPA ACs under NGS (was: SPAs cleanup)

2009-12-02T14:47:40Z

On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...> wrote:

On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria <davitofrg@...> wrote:

2009/12/2 Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...>

included in your RFC either. For example, in your RFC, you said to leave
[Christmas music] alone, now you're saying to merge it after NGS. In
your RFC you never mentioned Linguaphone, now you're saying to merge it
into [unknown] (and I'd disagree with that anyway, since those are
language courses).

I still disagree with renaming the language courses one (like I
mentioned to you a while back on IRC) because it sounds really formal
and rather unnatural to me. All the libraries I've been to call that
section "language courses" (bookshops just have them in the "languages"

In my opinion, it's too generic. A Teaching Company lecture on, for example, "The History of the English Language" would seem to fit much better into [language courses] than [language instruction], though it's not a "learn to speak a language" course (which was the intent of that SPA, if I follow what you intended when you created that SPA).

section) and I don't see the problem with that name. I'm also not sure
about merging it into [no artist] after NGS so I'd rather that one was
left out for now - we really need a proper discussion about what exactly
we should do with language courses anyway. In fact, I'd actually prefer
if we left the final decision about all the post-NGS merges until NGS is
actually ready to be released. We don't know when that will be nor what
will happen in the meantime. It's not like it would change anything at
the moment anyway and it would have the benefit of making your RFC a bit
shorter and easier to deal with.

This is the only bit I really wold disagree with here. Artist credits are a core component of the NGS release. The concept is pretty clear, and that code's been solid for a good months. It's pretty unlikely that it'll either be dropped or changed in any significant manner. The only reason to even use it here would be to retain potentially useful "unknown-identifier-helper' data, until those can be better identified.

To answer Frederick and Warp on this same general topic:

(warp)

> I expect none of these have Konami or Namco or whatever as a track or
> release artist on the cover, so keeping them as artist credit while
> having it point the mbid to [unknown] doesn't really help either.

(Frederick)

> - why merge Disney to [Disney], then [Disney] to unknown (why 2 steps)
> - if it is wise to merge [Disney] to [unknown]
> - same for [gregorian chant] -> [religious music] -> [unknown]
> And more widely, merging all this, aren't we losing some piece of very valuable information? I agree using SPAs is not the best > way to record this information, but still...

Well, the SPAs the above reference, from this proposal, are Capcom, KONAMI, Namco, Nintendo, Sega, Disney, and [gregorian chant]. All but the last are old "label as artists" that never have been entirely cleaned up. Not one of those 6 is a valid "true" artist identification. That info is perhaps a little useful inidentifying the correct true artist, hence moving it to an AC, while showing the track/release is nothing more, really, than [unknown] (hence resolving to that mbid). Moving Disney to [Disney] would be in keeping with using brackets for any SPA name.

As for [gregorian chant], esp given all the already-accomplished chant merges into that SPA, it no longer actually contains just gregorian chants. It's become a catchall for almost every type of chant, plus other assorted religeous music. Hence renaming it for now, to reflect it's true nature ("[religious music]"), then under NGS, just as with the above 6, merging it to [unknown], but retaining that identity (via the AC) as "religious music", in hopes it can perhaps help to identify those tracks, so they can either be assigned to the correct artist, or [anonymous], whichever would be relevant to the particular track or release.

I realise that I wasn't thinking correctly. I thought that SPAs were used as a way to indicate the type of music, something like folksonomy. This may actually be how it was used, but of course this was completely wrong, technically speaking.

So now I am thinking correctly (well, I think I am :-) ). I think the real issue is: could any of those releases be linked to a real Artist, and if so would your changes make it more difficult? I believe the answer is yes. Of course, changes such as Disney -> [Disney] are without consequence (apart from making things more clear). [gregorian chant] -> [religious music] only reflects the actual situation, so I believe it is correct too. But the last step merging everything to [unknown] without at least ensuring that the old SPA is copied to the annotation seems dangerous to me.

I think we're on the same page now. :) It's actually the exact situation you describe above which is why I'd suggested a 2 stage merge; the first (the ones to do now) would be the merges/renames where there's no potentially useful data to be lost. The second, the one being saved for post-NGS, would be specifically to preserve that data we're now both talking about. We could put it into annotations, but that's a slow and labor intensive process, not to mention that very few people ever actually look at track annotations. My thought was to instead take advantage of artist credits, being introduced in NGS, to store that data.

AC's would normally be something like (to use a case which will be familiar to most, though I doubt this particular one would ever pass a vote), Track X with AC of AFX, and AFX being an AC for Aphex Twin. Here the same would be done - track X would (post-merge) have AC of "[religeous music]", but the "[religeous music]" would be moved to be an AC of "[unknown]", rather than remain an AC of a separate "[religeous music]" artist. (I hope that made sense?)

Gregorian chant is for me a special case (other types of religious music might be similar, but gregorian is the only one about which I know a little history). I feel a true SPA for it would make sense, that it is very close to the MB concept of Artist. So that at some step, I think that recreating a [gregorian chant] with a clean and correct list would be a good idea.

Perhaps, but I think the whole chant SPA artist concept needs some thought. Gregorian, et al, where no composer is identifiable, might make more sense, long term, as an AC of the "[anonymous]" SPA, rather than existing as separate and distinct SPAs. On the other hand, not to get too far from this RFC (which does *not* include this bit here! :D) no matter the type of chant, where no composer is knowable, "[anonymous]" really is the correct SPA artist, even without AC... "gregorian chant" would seem far more a genre than even a distinct AC of "[anonymous]". Any exception to make it somehow any other type of distinction would invariably eventually lead to the same "all sorts of chant ACs" problem we currently had/have with regards to all the chant SPAs.

Splitting off this thread, as this specific bit isn't part of the RFC, but rather deals with what'll likely be an ongoing discussion until after the NGS launch. (Plus, how many acronyms can be stuffed into a MB subject line? :D)

After just a few minutes reflection on the above, I think it may well be worth keeping the SPA AC's "clean" following NGS, with the exception of the [unknown] artist. I don't think there's really disagreement on the cleanup concept, only on some implementation details? That said, the resulting SPAs each would have a well-defined role. Only [unknown] serves as a catchall; the others are pretty precise in their roles. My sense is that ACs should, outside of [unknown], be saved for those cases where there actually is some credit given to {whatever} - "Church Chimes" and "Chimes" as ACs of [no artist], for example. "Gregorian Chant" and the like seem far more folksonomic (is that the proper word for this?) than attributive; "chant", "classical", etc could easily also be used with equivalent "correctness", if not the same degree of precision. Otherwise, we could look 5 or 10 years down the road, and see hundreds of ACs in [no artist] or [anonymous] - "17th century French Romantic-period classical music", "Trip hop", "Electrobass", "waterfall", "rain", "thunderstorm", etc, just as we saw starting to happen with the chant and other SPAs now.

The only place it might be worthwhile to allow "folksonomic ACs" for SPAs would be within [unknown], for all the reasons we've been talking about with regards to CAPCOM, Sega, and the like, as an aid to eventually moving those tracks to the proper artists, when we figure out just what those proper artist(s) are for any given track.

I'm sure we'll have an AC guideline at some point, but since we're somewhat dealing with it already here, with regards to SPAs, I figured it may well be worth starting that discussion on designing that guideline. :)

Brian

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

Re: RFV: SPAs cleanup

2009-12-02T14:33:57Z

On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 3:55 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria <davitofrg@...> wrote:

2009/12/2 Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...>

included in your RFC either. For example, in your RFC, you said to leave
[Christmas music] alone, now you're saying to merge it after NGS. In
your RFC you never mentioned Linguaphone, now you're saying to merge it
into [unknown] (and I'd disagree with that anyway, since those are
language courses).

I still disagree with renaming the language courses one (like I
mentioned to you a while back on IRC) because it sounds really formal
and rather unnatural to me. All the libraries I've been to call that
section "language courses" (bookshops just have them in the "languages"

In my opinion, it's too generic. A Teaching Company lecture on, for example, "The History of the English Language" would seem to fit much better into [language courses] than [language instruction], though it's not a "learn to speak a language" course (which was the intent of that SPA, if I follow what you intended when you created that SPA).

section) and I don't see the problem with that name. I'm also not sure
about merging it into [no artist] after NGS so I'd rather that one was
left out for now - we really need a proper discussion about what exactly
we should do with language courses anyway. In fact, I'd actually prefer
if we left the final decision about all the post-NGS merges until NGS is
actually ready to be released. We don't know when that will be nor what
will happen in the meantime. It's not like it would change anything at
the moment anyway and it would have the benefit of making your RFC a bit
shorter and easier to deal with.

This is the only bit I really wold disagree with here. Artist credits are a core component of the NGS release. The concept is pretty clear, and that code's been solid for a good months. It's pretty unlikely that it'll either be dropped or changed in any significant manner. The only reason to even use it here would be to retain potentially useful "unknown-identifier-helper' data, until those can be better identified.

To answer Frederick and Warp on this same general topic:

(warp)

> I expect none of these have Konami or Namco or whatever as a track or
> release artist on the cover, so keeping them as artist credit while
> having it point the mbid to [unknown] doesn't really help either.

(Frederick)

> - why merge Disney to [Disney], then [Disney] to unknown (why 2 steps)
> - if it is wise to merge [Disney] to [unknown]
> - same for [gregorian chant] -> [religious music] -> [unknown]
> And more widely, merging all this, aren't we losing some piece of very valuable information? I agree using SPAs is not the best > way to record this information, but still...

Well, the SPAs the above reference, from this proposal, are Capcom, KONAMI, Namco, Nintendo, Sega, Disney, and [gregorian chant]. All but the last are old "label as artists" that never have been entirely cleaned up. Not one of those 6 is a valid "true" artist identification. That info is perhaps a little useful inidentifying the correct true artist, hence moving it to an AC, while showing the track/release is nothing more, really, than [unknown] (hence resolving to that mbid). Moving Disney to [Disney] would be in keeping with using brackets for any SPA name.

As for [gregorian chant], esp given all the already-accomplished chant merges into that SPA, it no longer actually contains just gregorian chants. It's become a catchall for almost every type of chant, plus other assorted religeous music. Hence renaming it for now, to reflect it's true nature ("[religious music]"), then under NGS, just as with the above 6, merging it to [unknown], but retaining that identity (via the AC) as "religious music", in hopes it can perhaps help to identify those tracks, so they can either be assigned to the correct artist, or [anonymous], whichever would be relevant to the particular track or release.

I realise that I wasn't thinking correctly. I thought that SPAs were used as a way to indicate the type of music, something like folksonomy. This may actually be how it was used, but of course this was completely wrong, technically speaking.

So now I am thinking correctly (well, I think I am :-) ). I think the real issue is: could any of those releases be linked to a real Artist, and if so would your changes make it more difficult? I believe the answer is yes. Of course, changes such as Disney -> [Disney] are without consequence (apart from making things more clear). [gregorian chant] -> [religious music] only reflects the actual situation, so I believe it is correct too. But the last step merging everything to [unknown] without at least ensuring that the old SPA is copied to the annotation seems dangerous to me.

I think we're on the same page now. :) It's actually the exact situation you describe above which is why I'd suggested a 2 stage merge; the first (the ones to do now) would be the merges/renames where there's no potentially useful data to be lost. The second, the one being saved for post-NGS, would be specifically to preserve that data we're now both talking about. We could put it into annotations, but that's a slow and labor intensive process, not to mention that very few people ever actually look at track annotations. My thought was to instead take advantage of artist credits, being introduced in NGS, to store that data.

AC's would normally be something like (to use a case which will be familiar to most, though I doubt this particular one would ever pass a vote), Track X with AC of AFX, and AFX being an AC for Aphex Twin. Here the same would be done - track X would (post-merge) have AC of "[religeous music]", but the "[religeous music]" would be moved to be an AC of "[unknown]", rather than remain an AC of a separate "[religeous music]" artist. (I hope that made sense?)

Gregorian chant is for me a special case (other types of religious music might be similar, but gregorian is the only one about which I know a little history). I feel a true SPA for it would make sense, that it is very close to the MB concept of Artist. So that at some step, I think that recreating a [gregorian chant] with a clean and correct list would be a good idea.

Perhaps, but I think the whole chant SPA artist concept needs some thought. Gregorian, et al, where no composer is identifiable, might make more sense, long term, as an AC of the "[anonymous]" SPA, rather than existing as separate and distinct SPAs. On the other hand, not to get too far from this RFC (which does *not* include this bit here! :D) no matter the type of chant, where no composer is knowable, "[anonymous]" really is the correct SPA artist, even without AC... "gregorian chant" would seem far more a genre than even a distinct AC of "[anonymous]". Any exception to make it somehow any other type of distinction would invariably eventually lead to the same "all sorts of chant ACs" problem we currently had/have with regards to all the chant SPAs.

Brian

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

Re: RFC: Modify edit conditions for destructive edits

2009-12-02T09:03:36Z

2009/12/1 Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...>:

> I ran into a situation today where, when retagging some files, I found that
> a vinyl VA release I'd entered (with 4 verification links to show it's
> existence plus track list, etc) 6 months ago had been removed. Being VA,
> especially, it's hard to catch these, as you cannot subscribe to releases,
> nor to VA. But even had it been some specific artist, unless one is
> diligent about checking open remove * edits, these can slip through without
> the adding editor noticing.
>
> This RFC is intended to solve one other problem this edit brought to my
> attention, namely, that destructive edits pass on a 0:0 vote at expiration,
> just like most other edit types. This RFC would change the following edit
> types so that, if on expiration the edit count is 0:0, the edit would fail,
> rather than pass:
>
>     * Remove Artist
>     * Remove Artist Alias
>     * Remove Disc ID
>     * Remove Release
>     * Remove Release Event(s)
>     * Remove Releases
>     * Remove Track
>     * Remove PUID
>     * Remove Relationship
>     * Remove Relationship Attribute
>     * Remove Relationship Type
>     * Remove Release Group
>     * Remove ISRC
>     * Remove Label
>     * Remove Label Alias
>
> It's my opinion that any destructive edit should have at least some review -
> additive or modifying edits can always be fixed if bad ones expire in, but
> destructive edits mean the entire entity has to be recreated from scratch,
> which is far more work to fix. (I'm tempted to suggest that destructive
> edits should only pass if they at least meet the threshold for them to pass
> - *:3, rather than simply 0:1, but the latter has no apparent negatives,
> while the former might have some hidden problems that simply haven't
> occurred to me.)
>
> In addition, I would note that the particular remove edit in this case came
> from an editor who, in the 8 months since he created his account, has made a
> whole 2 edits - only one (this one) a votable edit, and who ignored the info
> given in the add release edit. I've noticed that most other problematic (at
> best misguided, but often contrary to guidelines, common sense, etc)
> destructive edits that I've encountered also came from similarly new and
> low-edit-count editors. Thus, in addition to modifying the minimum vote
> count for such an edit to pass, I would also add the same conditions to
> create destructive edits which apply to creating add NAT edits; this would
> raise the minimum edit count to even create such an edit, if only slightly,
> in hopes that editors with 10 voted edits at least have some basic
> familiarity with MusicBrainz, which cannot be assumed of the brand new
> editor making his or her first voted edit.
>
> Brian
>
> Side note: In the future, it'd be nice also if we could have two new
> abilities - have the adding editor auto-included on the email list for any
> destructive edit (so if you added the release, if someone tries to remove
> it, you get emailed), but also, to make researching the remove edit much
> more possible, it'd be nice if the "This release has been removed" and "This
> release group has been removed" texts also contained a link to the removing
> edit. But those are merely requests for future server development, so I'm
> not making them part of this RFC.
> _______________________________________________
> Musicbrainz-style mailing list
> Musicbrainz-style@...
> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
>

I've done so few removals that I didn't realise this was the case.
With artists and releases, merges are of course more common and so my
removals have tended to be limited to PUIDs and ISRCs.

My main concern is that already mentioned earlier in the discussion;
that removals then become impossible due to lack of interest. I think
leaving them open sounds like a good solution - just having no timeout
for removals with zero votes would be sufficient. Adding a report so
that people could quickly view pending removals with zero votes would
also be a good idea. This is especially important as removals are the
one set of edits that can't be autoedited (a case which illustrates an
clear inconsistency with its current zero-vote-approval status).

I'm not sure if we should treat them all equally. As I say, removals
of artists and releases should be rare and results in invalid MBIDs.
The latter also means removing a significant amount of data. For
these, there should be a strong case for removal especially if
relationships have been added. Obviously there's a big difference
between a simple tracklisting with no cited sources and a release with
ARs, etc. and all of this is something that needs to be considered in
a vote.

PUIDs, discIDs and ISRCs are different as they tend to only be
verifiable by those who own the release (or at least a rip of it in
the case of a PUID). I'm not sure how these should be handled, but
there does need to be a strong case for removal. Usually, the case
here is one of obvious duplication or error (e.g. a PUID attached to
two tracks on a release, and then the same track on other releases),
which may mean these need less of a majority to succeed.
--
Andrew :-)

Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
http://openjdk.java.net

PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA 7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8

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

Re: RFV: SPAs cleanup

2009-12-02T00:55:58Z

2009/12/2 Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...>

included in your RFC either. For example, in your RFC, you said to leave
[Christmas music] alone, now you're saying to merge it after NGS. In
your RFC you never mentioned Linguaphone, now you're saying to merge it
into [unknown] (and I'd disagree with that anyway, since those are
language courses).

I still disagree with renaming the language courses one (like I
mentioned to you a while back on IRC) because it sounds really formal
and rather unnatural to me. All the libraries I've been to call that
section "language courses" (bookshops just have them in the "languages"

In my opinion, it's too generic. A Teaching Company lecture on, for example, "The History of the English Language" would seem to fit much better into [language courses] than [language instruction], though it's not a "learn to speak a language" course (which was the intent of that SPA, if I follow what you intended when you created that SPA).

section) and I don't see the problem with that name. I'm also not sure
about merging it into [no artist] after NGS so I'd rather that one was
left out for now - we really need a proper discussion about what exactly
we should do with language courses anyway. In fact, I'd actually prefer
if we left the final decision about all the post-NGS merges until NGS is
actually ready to be released. We don't know when that will be nor what
will happen in the meantime. It's not like it would change anything at
the moment anyway and it would have the benefit of making your RFC a bit
shorter and easier to deal with.

This is the only bit I really wold disagree with here. Artist credits are a core component of the NGS release. The concept is pretty clear, and that code's been solid for a good months. It's pretty unlikely that it'll either be dropped or changed in any significant manner. The only reason to even use it here would be to retain potentially useful "unknown-identifier-helper' data, until those can be better identified.

To answer Frederick and Warp on this same general topic:

(warp)

> I expect none of these have Konami or Namco or whatever as a track or
> release artist on the cover, so keeping them as artist credit while
> having it point the mbid to [unknown] doesn't really help either.

(Frederick)

> - why merge Disney to [Disney], then [Disney] to unknown (why 2 steps)
> - if it is wise to merge [Disney] to [unknown]
> - same for [gregorian chant] -> [religious music] -> [unknown]
> And more widely, merging all this, aren't we losing some piece of very valuable information? I agree using SPAs is not the best > way to record this information, but still...

Well, the SPAs the above reference, from this proposal, are Capcom, KONAMI, Namco, Nintendo, Sega, Disney, and [gregorian chant]. All but the last are old "label as artists" that never have been entirely cleaned up. Not one of those 6 is a valid "true" artist identification. That info is perhaps a little useful inidentifying the correct true artist, hence moving it to an AC, while showing the track/release is nothing more, really, than [unknown] (hence resolving to that mbid). Moving Disney to [Disney] would be in keeping with using brackets for any SPA name.

As for [gregorian chant], esp given all the already-accomplished chant merges into that SPA, it no longer actually contains just gregorian chants. It's become a catchall for almost every type of chant, plus other assorted religeous music. Hence renaming it for now, to reflect it's true nature ("[religious music]"), then under NGS, just as with the above 6, merging it to [unknown], but retaining that identity (via the AC) as "religious music", in hopes it can perhaps help to identify those tracks, so they can either be assigned to the correct artist, or [anonymous], whichever would be relevant to the particular track or release.

I realise that I wasn't thinking correctly. I thought that SPAs were used as a way to indicate the type of music, something like folksonomy. This may actually be how it was used, but of course this was completely wrong, technically speaking.

So now I am thinking correctly (well, I think I am :-) ). I think the real issue is: could any of those releases be linked to a real Artist, and if so would your changes make it more difficult? I believe the answer is yes. Of course, changes such as Disney -> [Disney] are without consequence (apart from making things more clear). [gregorian chant] -> [religious music] only reflects the actual situation, so I believe it is correct too. But the last step merging everything to [unknown] without at least ensuring that the old SPA is copied to the annotation seems dangerous to me.

Gregorian chant is for me a special case (other types of religious music might be similar, but gregorian is the only one about which I know a little history). I feel a true SPA for it would make sense, that it is very close to the MB concept of Artist. So that at some step, I think that recreating a [gregorian chant] with a clean and correct list would be a good idea.

Re: RFV: SPAs cleanup

2009-12-01T21:40:44Z

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Nikki <aeizyx@...> wrote:

I'd like to veto this because, while I probably do agree with many of

Ok, though I will revert this to an active RFC, rather than let it die.

the things you're suggesting, I don't have time to fully review it. The
wiki page was only just created so it certainly wasn't included in your
RFC and the majority of the 30 or so merges you're proposing weren't

Noted, though the wikipage is essentially just a cleaned up version of the RFC, merged with relevant the old wikipages, as described in the RFC in detail (though not actually written as such until today).

included in your RFC either. For example, in your RFC, you said to leave
[Christmas music] alone, now you're saying to merge it after NGS. In
your RFC you never mentioned Linguaphone, now you're saying to merge it
into [unknown] (and I'd disagree with that anyway, since those are
language courses).

I still disagree with renaming the language courses one (like I
mentioned to you a while back on IRC) because it sounds really formal
and rather unnatural to me. All the libraries I've been to call that
section "language courses" (bookshops just have them in the "languages"

In my opinion, it's too generic. A Teaching Company lecture on, for example, "The History of the English Language" would seem to fit much better into [language courses] than [language instruction], though it's not a "learn to speak a language" course (which was the intent of that SPA, if I follow what you intended when you created that SPA).

section) and I don't see the problem with that name. I'm also not sure
about merging it into [no artist] after NGS so I'd rather that one was
left out for now - we really need a proper discussion about what exactly
we should do with language courses anyway. In fact, I'd actually prefer
if we left the final decision about all the post-NGS merges until NGS is
actually ready to be released. We don't know when that will be nor what
will happen in the meantime. It's not like it would change anything at
the moment anyway and it would have the benefit of making your RFC a bit
shorter and easier to deal with.

This is the only bit I really wold disagree with here. Artist credits are a core component of the NGS release. The concept is pretty clear, and that code's been solid for a good months. It's pretty unlikely that it'll either be dropped or changed in any significant manner. The only reason to even use it here would be to retain potentially useful "unknown-identifier-helper' data, until those can be better identified.

To answer Frederick and Warp on this same general topic:

(warp)
> I expect none of these have Konami or Namco or whatever as a track or
> release artist on the cover, so keeping them as artist credit while
> having it point the mbid to [unknown] doesn't really help either.

(Frederick)
> - why merge Disney to [Disney], then [Disney] to unknown (why 2 steps)
> - if it is wise to merge [Disney] to [unknown]
> - same for [gregorian chant] -> [religious music] -> [unknown]
> And more widely, merging all this, aren't we losing some piece of very valuable information? I agree using SPAs is not the best > way to record this information, but still...

Well, the SPAs the above reference, from this proposal, are Capcom, KONAMI, Namco, Nintendo, Sega, Disney, and [gregorian chant]. All but the last are old "label as artists" that never have been entirely cleaned up. Not one of those 6 is a valid "true" artist identification. That info is perhaps a little useful inidentifying the correct true artist, hence moving it to an AC, while showing the track/release is nothing more, really, than [unknown] (hence resolving to that mbid). Moving Disney to [Disney] would be in keeping with using brackets for any SPA name.

As for [gregorian chant], esp given all the already-accomplished chant merges into that SPA, it no longer actually contains just gregorian chants. It's become a catchall for almost every type of chant, plus other assorted religeous music. Hence renaming it for now, to reflect it's true nature ("[religious music]"), then under NGS, just as with the above 6, merging it to [unknown], but retaining that identity (via the AC) as "religious music", in hopes it can perhaps help to identify those tracks, so they can either be assigned to the correct artist, or [anonymous], whichever would be relevant to the particular track or release.

Brian

PS: Aurélien, re the length of the proposal, I think 2+ months open and undisputed is perhaps long enough time for anyone to read any RFC, no matter how long. ...And the length of the RFC was directly due to the reason for the RFC itself; note that most of the RFC's length, both times it was sent, was due to the sheer number of SPAs listed. (I've not checked, but for all I know, even yet new ones have since been created, and haven't yet been incorporated here. I know there's other label as artists / other SPA-like artists that I've seen before, but noone had ever added to the wiki, so those I've yet missed also haven't been included here. :P)

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

Re: RFV: SPAs cleanup

2009-12-01T15:46:30Z

I'd like to veto this because, while I probably do agree with many of
the things you're suggesting, I don't have time to fully review it. The
wiki page was only just created so it certainly wasn't included in your
RFC and the majority of the 30 or so merges you're proposing weren't
included in your RFC either. For example, in your RFC, you said to leave
[Christmas music] alone, now you're saying to merge it after NGS. In
your RFC you never mentioned Linguaphone, now you're saying to merge it
into [unknown] (and I'd disagree with that anyway, since those are
language courses).

I still disagree with renaming the language courses one (like I
mentioned to you a while back on IRC) because it sounds really formal
and rather unnatural to me. All the libraries I've been to call that
section "language courses" (bookshops just have them in the "languages"
section) and I don't see the problem with that name. I'm also not sure
about merging it into [no artist] after NGS so I'd rather that one was
left out for now - we really need a proper discussion about what exactly
we should do with language courses anyway. In fact, I'd actually prefer
if we left the final decision about all the post-NGS merges until NGS is
actually ready to be released. We don't know when that will be nor what
will happen in the meantime. It's not like it would change anything at
the moment anyway and it would have the benefit of making your RFC a bit
shorter and easier to deal with.

Nikki

Brian Schweitzer wrote:

> This has been in RFC since September, without anyone seeming to object, so
> I'm moving it to RFV stage, to expire Dec 3 at 2:30pm EST.
>
> This is a proposal to clean up all the Special Purpose Artists and their
> associated wiki pages.
>
> Replace http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist with
> http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/BrianFreud/Special_Purpose_Artist .
>
> The following stub-type wiki pages would be changed to be simple redirects
> to http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist :
> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist
> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist_Style
> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Data_Track
> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Various_Artists
> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Unknown_Artist
> * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Disney
>
> Renames:
> * Rename "[data track]" to "[data]".
> * Rename "Classical" to "[classical music]".
> * Rename "[musical]" to "[musical theater]".
> * Rename "Disney" to "[Disney]".
> * Rename "[language courses]" into "[language instruction]".
> * Rename "[gregorian chant]" to "[religious music]". (Given the various
> merges that have occurred already, there's far more than just gregorian
> chants in there now already).
>
> Part one of the merges (to be done now):
> * Merge "Data CD" into "[data]".
>
> * Merge "[east african music]" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Ethnic Music Compilations" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Orchestra" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "[traditional]" into "[unknown]".
>
> * Merge "[islamic chant]" into "[religious music]".
> * Merge "[spiritual]" into "[religious music]".
>
> (Note: [znamenny chant], [Sarum chant], [Bysantine chant],
> [kiev-pechersk chant], [kiev chant], and [common chant] have been removed
> from the proposal, as they've already been merged into [gregorian chant].)
>
> * Merge "Musical" into "[musical theater]".
>
> * Merge "Bollywood" into "[soundtrack]".
> * Merge "Soundtrack" into "[soundtrack]".
> * Merge "Kimagure Orange Road" into "[soundtrack]".
> * Merge "[television theme songs]" into "[soundtrack]".
>
> * Merge "Alan Lomax Collection, The" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Allegro Corporation" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation)" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "BBC Radio Collection" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Capcom" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "(The) Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" into
> "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Dancelife" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "ESPN" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Hollywood Edge" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "KONAMI" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "LaserLight Digital" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Lifescapes" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Linguaphone" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Living Language" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Looney Tunes" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Namco" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Nintendo" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Pamplin Music" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Pickin' On" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Scary Sounds" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Sega" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "(The) Smithsonian Collection" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Vineyard Music" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Warner Classics" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Wordsound" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "3D Realms" into "[unknown]".
>
> Part two of the merges (to be done after NGS goes live, with the current SPA
> retained as the artist credit):
> * Merge "[Christmas music]" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "[Church Chimes]" into "[no artist]".
> * Merge "[classical music]" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "[Disney]" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "[language instruction]" into "[no artist]".
> * Merge "[musical theater]" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "[nature sounds]" into "[no artist]".
> * Merge "[news report]" into "[no artist]".
> * Merge "[religious music]" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "[soundtrack]" into "[unknown]".
>
> "Ella Fitzgerald & Chick Webb" and "Cenaclul Flacăra" would be accepted as
> SPAs, but ignored from documentation, as they're rare cat-corner cases with
> good reason to exist.
>
> "[gregorian chant] & Antonio de Cabezón", "[gregorian chant] & Francisco
> Guerrero", "[gregorian chant] & Francisco Guerrero & Bricio Gaudi", and
> "[gregorian chant] & Philippe Rogier" would be ignored, as they'll disappear
> with NGS anyhow.
>
> Brian
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Re: RFV: SPAs cleanup

2009-12-01T15:37:24Z

Brian Schweitzer wrote:
> This has been in RFC since September, without anyone seeming to object,
Let's say that I still haven't found the time to read this horribly long
proposal.
> so I'm moving it to RFV stage, to expire Dec 3 at 2:30pm EST.
>
I would like to veto just for the purpose of extending the RFV stage.
I fear that there are a lot of changes involved that would be really
difficult to revert, so I need to be sure that each of the proposed
changes is OK.

PS: the same way you're suggesting on a different thread that
destructive edits don't pass on a 0:0 vote,
what about preventing a RFC to be moved to RFV if the RFC hasn't
received any comment :P

- Aurélien

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

Re: RFV: SPAs cleanup

2009-12-01T14:10:22Z

On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 04:03:57PM -0500, Brian Schweitzer wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Kuno Woudt <kuno@...> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 02:23:44PM -0500, Brian Schweitzer wrote:
> > > This has been in RFC since September, without anyone seeming to object,
> > so
> > > I'm moving it to RFV stage, to expire Dec 3 at 2:30pm EST.
> > >
> >
> > I am not veto'ing this proposal, but I do disagree with the merges
> > suggested below.
> >
> > > * Merge "Capcom" into "[unknown]".
> > > * Merge "KONAMI" into "[unknown]".
> > > * Merge "Namco" into "[unknown]".
> > > * Merge "Nintendo" into "[unknown]".
> > > * Merge "Sega" into "[unknown]".
> >
> > I think it is more ueful to leave this as is, it will be easier to
> > track down the correct artists for these if you know the publisher.
> >
> > I'm ok with moving those releases to [unknown] if the information is
> > moved to the annotation (or, if for example the label matches the
> > artist) -- but just merging these artists without checking each of the
> > releases affected seems like a particularly bad plan.
> >
> > I object to this for the video game artists cited above and any of the
> > other bogus artists, please do not merge them unless there is no
> > information lost.
> >
> > -- kuno / warp.
> >
>
>
> Makes a lot of sense to me - it's for that same reason that I shifted some
> of the other merges to after NGS. Would it make more sense for you if I
> kept those 5 on the list to merge, but shifted them from the "now" merges
> list to instead being on the "after NGS so we can keep the info in the AC"
> merges list?

I expect none of these have Konami or Namco or whatever as a track or
release artist on the cover, so keeping them as artist credit while
having it point the mbid to [unknown] doesn't really help either.

The only correct thing is to go through the list, and fix these
releases. Perhaps having them show up on the website and in picard as
[unknown] will make users more inclined to fix them, in that sense I'm
in favour of moving to [unknown] now, it's just that for those users
doing the fixing it will be easier if the previously used artist is
available in the annotation for reference.

-- kuno / warp.

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

Re: RFV: SPAs cleanup

2009-12-01T14:05:21Z

2009/12/1 Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...>

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria <davitofrg@...> wrote:

2009/12/1 Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...>

This has been in RFC since September, without anyone seeming to object, so I'm moving it to RFV stage, to expire Dec 3 at 2:30pm EST.

This is a proposal to clean up all the Special Purpose Artists and their associated wiki pages.

Replace http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist with http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/BrianFreud/Special_Purpose_Artist .

The following stub-type wiki pages would be changed to be simple redirects to http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist :
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist_Style
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Data_Track
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Various_Artists
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Unknown_Artist
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Disney

Renames:
    * Rename "[data track]" to "[data]".
    * Rename "Classical" to "[classical music]".
    * Rename "[musical]" to "[musical theater]".
    * Rename "Disney" to "[Disney]".
    * Rename "[language courses]" into "[language instruction]".
    * Rename "[gregorian chant]" to "[religious music]". (Given the various merges that have occurred already, there's far more than just gregorian chants in there now already).

Part one of the merges (to be done now):
    * Merge "Data CD" into "[data]".

    * Merge "[east african music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Ethnic Music Compilations" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Orchestra" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[traditional]" into "[unknown]".

    * Merge "[islamic chant]" into "[religious music]".
    * Merge "[spiritual]" into "[religious music]".

    (Note: [znamenny chant], [Sarum chant], [Bysantine chant], [kiev-pechersk chant], [kiev chant], and [common chant] have been removed from the proposal, as they've already been merged into [gregorian chant].)

    * Merge "Musical" into "[musical theater]".

    * Merge "Bollywood" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "Soundtrack" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "Kimagure Orange Road" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "[television theme songs]" into "[soundtrack]".

    * Merge "Alan Lomax Collection, The" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Allegro Corporation" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation)" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "BBC Radio Collection" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Capcom" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "(The) Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Dancelife" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "ESPN" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Hollywood Edge" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "KONAMI" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "LaserLight Digital" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Lifescapes" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Linguaphone" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Living Language" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Looney Tunes" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Namco" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Nintendo" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Pamplin Music" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Pickin' On" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Scary Sounds" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Sega" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "(The) Smithsonian Collection" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Vineyard Music" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Warner Classics" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Wordsound" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "3D Realms" into "[unknown]".

Part two of the merges (to be done after NGS goes live, with the current SPA retained as the artist credit):
    * Merge "[Christmas music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[Church Chimes]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[classical music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[Disney]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[language instruction]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[musical theater]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[nature sounds]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[news report]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[religious music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[soundtrack]" into "[unknown]".

"Ella Fitzgerald & Chick Webb" and "Cenaclul Flacăra" would be accepted as SPAs, but ignored from documentation, as they're rare cat-corner cases with good reason to exist.

"[gregorian chant] & Antonio de Cabezón", "[gregorian chant] & Francisco Guerrero", "[gregorian chant] & Francisco Guerrero & Bricio Gaudi", and "[gregorian chant] & Philippe Rogier" would be ignored, as they'll disappear with NGS anyhow.

"merge" would mean the old SPA would disappear, right?

Yes - one main goal of this being to simplify the SPAs, and to get rid of the near-redundancies. (If the goal of most of them is to get an artist ID'd, having a semi-specific, yet essentially useless and non-specific "artist" seems counterproductive...)

I am wondering
- why merge Disney to [Disney], then [Disney] to unknown (why 2 steps)
- if it is wise to merge [Disney] to [unknown]

- same for [gregorian chant] -> [religious music] -> [unknown]

And more widely, merging all this, aren't we losing some piece of very valuable information? I agree using SPAs is not the best way to record this information, but still...

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

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

Re: RFC: Modify edit conditions for destructive edits

2009-12-01T13:07:10Z

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Philipp Wolfer <ph.wolfer@...> wrote:

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...> wrote:

It's my opinion that any destructive edit should have at least some review -
additive or modifying edits can always be fixed if bad ones expire in, but
destructive edits mean the entire entity has to be recreated from scratch,
which is far more work to fix.

+1 on this. But I like the suggestion to keep such edits open until they have been voted on.

--
Philipp

Voted in which way? Simply having any vote at all (something akin to "14+ days, the edit goes into 'sudden death'), or a decisive vote (3:* or *:3, majority decision, just without time limit)?

Brian

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

Re: RFV: SPAs cleanup

2009-12-01T13:05:20Z

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria <davitofrg@...> wrote:

2009/12/1 Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...>

This has been in RFC since September, without anyone seeming to object, so I'm moving it to RFV stage, to expire Dec 3 at 2:30pm EST.

This is a proposal to clean up all the Special Purpose Artists and their associated wiki pages.

Replace http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist with http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/BrianFreud/Special_Purpose_Artist .

The following stub-type wiki pages would be changed to be simple redirects to http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist :
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist_Style
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Data_Track
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Various_Artists
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Unknown_Artist
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Disney

Renames:
    * Rename "[data track]" to "[data]".
    * Rename "Classical" to "[classical music]".
    * Rename "[musical]" to "[musical theater]".
    * Rename "Disney" to "[Disney]".
    * Rename "[language courses]" into "[language instruction]".
    * Rename "[gregorian chant]" to "[religious music]". (Given the various merges that have occurred already, there's far more than just gregorian chants in there now already).

Part one of the merges (to be done now):
    * Merge "Data CD" into "[data]".

    * Merge "[east african music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Ethnic Music Compilations" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Orchestra" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[traditional]" into "[unknown]".

    * Merge "[islamic chant]" into "[religious music]".
    * Merge "[spiritual]" into "[religious music]".

    (Note: [znamenny chant], [Sarum chant], [Bysantine chant], [kiev-pechersk chant], [kiev chant], and [common chant] have been removed from the proposal, as they've already been merged into [gregorian chant].)

    * Merge "Musical" into "[musical theater]".

    * Merge "Bollywood" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "Soundtrack" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "Kimagure Orange Road" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "[television theme songs]" into "[soundtrack]".

    * Merge "Alan Lomax Collection, The" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Allegro Corporation" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation)" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "BBC Radio Collection" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Capcom" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "(The) Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Dancelife" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "ESPN" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Hollywood Edge" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "KONAMI" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "LaserLight Digital" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Lifescapes" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Linguaphone" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Living Language" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Looney Tunes" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Namco" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Nintendo" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Pamplin Music" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Pickin' On" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Scary Sounds" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Sega" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "(The) Smithsonian Collection" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Vineyard Music" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Warner Classics" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Wordsound" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "3D Realms" into "[unknown]".

Part two of the merges (to be done after NGS goes live, with the current SPA retained as the artist credit):
    * Merge "[Christmas music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[Church Chimes]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[classical music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[Disney]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[language instruction]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[musical theater]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[nature sounds]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[news report]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[religious music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[soundtrack]" into "[unknown]".

"Ella Fitzgerald & Chick Webb" and "Cenaclul Flacăra" would be accepted as SPAs, but ignored from documentation, as they're rare cat-corner cases with good reason to exist.

"[gregorian chant] & Antonio de Cabezón", "[gregorian chant] & Francisco Guerrero", "[gregorian chant] & Francisco Guerrero & Bricio Gaudi", and "[gregorian chant] & Philippe Rogier" would be ignored, as they'll disappear with NGS anyhow.

"merge" would mean the old SPA would disappear, right?

Yes - one main goal of this being to simplify the SPAs, and to get rid of the near-redundancies. (If the goal of most of them is to get an artist ID'd, having a semi-specific, yet essentially useless and non-specific "artist" seems counterproductive...)

Brian

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

Re: RFV: SPAs cleanup

2009-12-01T13:03:57Z

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Kuno Woudt <kuno@...> wrote:

On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 02:23:44PM -0500, Brian Schweitzer wrote:
> This has been in RFC since September, without anyone seeming to object, so
> I'm moving it to RFV stage, to expire Dec 3 at 2:30pm EST.
>

I am not veto'ing this proposal, but I do disagree with the merges suggested below.

> * Merge "Capcom" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "KONAMI" into "[unknown]".

> * Merge "Namco" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Nintendo" into "[unknown]".

> * Merge "Sega" into "[unknown]".

I think it is more ueful to leave this as is, it will be easier to
track down the correct artists for these if you know the publisher.

I'm ok with moving those releases to [unknown] if the information is
moved to the annotation (or, if for example the label matches the
artist) -- but just merging these artists without checking each of the
releases affected seems like a particularly bad plan.

I object to this for the video game artists cited above and any of the
other bogus artists, please do not merge them unless there is no
information lost.

-- kuno / warp.

Makes a lot of sense to me - it's for that same reason that I shifted some of the other merges to after NGS. Would it make more sense for you if I kept those 5 on the list to merge, but shifted them from the "now" merges list to instead being on the "after NGS so we can keep the info in the AC" merges list?

Brian

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

Re: RFV: SPAs cleanup

2009-12-01T12:24:33Z

On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 02:23:44PM -0500, Brian Schweitzer wrote:
> This has been in RFC since September, without anyone seeming to object, so
> I'm moving it to RFV stage, to expire Dec 3 at 2:30pm EST.
>

I am not veto'ing this proposal, but I do disagree with the merges suggested below.

> * Merge "Capcom" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "KONAMI" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Namco" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Nintendo" into "[unknown]".
> * Merge "Sega" into "[unknown]".

I think it is more ueful to leave this as is, it will be easier to
track down the correct artists for these if you know the publisher.

I'm ok with moving those releases to [unknown] if the information is
moved to the annotation (or, if for example the label matches the
artist) -- but just merging these artists without checking each of the
releases affected seems like a particularly bad plan.

I object to this for the video game artists cited above and any of the
other bogus artists, please do not merge them unless there is no
information lost.

-- kuno / warp.

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

Re: RFV: SPAs cleanup

2009-12-01T12:16:04Z

2009/12/1 Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...>

This has been in RFC since September, without anyone seeming to object, so I'm moving it to RFV stage, to expire Dec 3 at 2:30pm EST.

This is a proposal to clean up all the Special Purpose Artists and their associated wiki pages.

Replace http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist with http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/BrianFreud/Special_Purpose_Artist .

The following stub-type wiki pages would be changed to be simple redirects to http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Special_Purpose_Artist :
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/No_Artist_Style
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Data_Track
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Various_Artists
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Unknown_Artist
    * http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Disney

Renames:
    * Rename "[data track]" to "[data]".
    * Rename "Classical" to "[classical music]".
    * Rename "[musical]" to "[musical theater]".
    * Rename "Disney" to "[Disney]".
    * Rename "[language courses]" into "[language instruction]".
    * Rename "[gregorian chant]" to "[religious music]". (Given the various merges that have occurred already, there's far more than just gregorian chants in there now already).

Part one of the merges (to be done now):
    * Merge "Data CD" into "[data]".

    * Merge "[east african music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Ethnic Music Compilations" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Orchestra" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[traditional]" into "[unknown]".

    * Merge "[islamic chant]" into "[religious music]".
    * Merge "[spiritual]" into "[religious music]".

    (Note: [znamenny chant], [Sarum chant], [Bysantine chant], [kiev-pechersk chant], [kiev chant], and [common chant] have been removed from the proposal, as they've already been merged into [gregorian chant].)

    * Merge "Musical" into "[musical theater]".

    * Merge "Bollywood" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "Soundtrack" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "Kimagure Orange Road" into "[soundtrack]".
    * Merge "[television theme songs]" into "[soundtrack]".

    * Merge "Alan Lomax Collection, The" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Allegro Corporation" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation)" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "BBC Radio Collection" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Capcom" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "(The) Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Dancelife" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "ESPN" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Hollywood Edge" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "KONAMI" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "LaserLight Digital" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Lifescapes" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Linguaphone" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Living Language" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Looney Tunes" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Namco" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Nintendo" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Pamplin Music" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Pickin' On" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Scary Sounds" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Sega" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "(The) Smithsonian Collection" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Vineyard Music" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Warner Classics" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "Wordsound" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "3D Realms" into "[unknown]".

Part two of the merges (to be done after NGS goes live, with the current SPA retained as the artist credit):
    * Merge "[Christmas music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[Church Chimes]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[classical music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[Disney]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[language instruction]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[musical theater]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[nature sounds]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[news report]" into "[no artist]".
    * Merge "[religious music]" into "[unknown]".
    * Merge "[soundtrack]" into "[unknown]".

"Ella Fitzgerald & Chick Webb" and "Cenaclul Flacăra" would be accepted as SPAs, but ignored from documentation, as they're rare cat-corner cases with good reason to exist.

"[gregorian chant] & Antonio de Cabezón", "[gregorian chant] & Francisco Guerrero", "[gregorian chant] & Francisco Guerrero & Bricio Gaudi", and "[gregorian chant] & Philippe Rogier" would be ignored, as they'll disappear with NGS anyhow.

"merge" would mean the old SPA would disappear, right?

--
Frederic Da Vitoria
(davitof)

Membre de l'April - « promouvoir et défendre le logiciel libre » - http://www.april.org

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

Re: RFC: Modify edit conditions for destructive edits

2009-12-01T12:10:59Z

On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:54 PM, Brian Schweitzer <brian.brianschweitzer@...> wrote:
>
> It's my opinion that any destructive edit should have at least some review -
> additive or modifying edits can always be fixed if bad ones expire in, but
> destructive edits mean the entire entity has to be recreated from scratch,
> which is far more work to fix.

+1 on this. But I like the suggestion to keep such edits open until they have been voted on.

--
Philipp

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

signature.asc (279 bytes) Download Attachment