On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 06:13:26PM +0000, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> Is there a known set of criteria for upping the quality level? I've
> only seen 'default' quality too (and most of my concerns are with
> releases I've entered from scratch). My intuitive understanding of
> where this is appropriate would be when the release has a full set of
> data (e.g. full titles, artists and times, inlay data converted to
> relationships such as producers, composers, etc., any links to URLs or
> other releases added).
With the Data Quality raised it becomes quite a bit harder to edit
a release, even just adding ARs (and it's rare for a release to be
_complete_, where complete means that all possible ARs have been
added and there really is nothing more which can or should be
editted about the release).
So, raising the Data Quality level should only be used when
neccesary (IMO), for example to prevent vandalism of an entry by
a popular artist.
The releases which need their Data Quality raised will probably be
popular enough to have a number of subscribers to vote 'yes' on any
good edits to the release.
-- kuno / warp.
_______________________________________________
MusicBrainz-users mailing list
MusicBrainz-users@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users
