On 10/06/2011 08:24, Alex Mauer wrote: > I'm not talking about collaboration relationships here,
OK. Look in the corner of the room. See that big grey thing with the flappy ears? > I'm talking about situations where it is appropriate to > use artist credits instead of creating separate artists AFAIK, the history of the collaboration artist relationship is that it was created as a stopgap solution to provide multiple primary artists where necessary. See http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Getting_Rid_Of_Featuring_Artist_Style. The MBz guidelines tell us to use a productivity/ longevity criterion to decide whether to use a collaboration relationship or a member-of-band relationship. Now we have NGS, which is the happy state towards which the stopgap was put in place. So, if all the editors did the right thing, then the groups joined by a collaboration relationship should be precisely those to be split using ARs, and those by a member-of-band relationship should be those to be left alone. The collaboration relationship should now be effectively obsolete. At the start of this thread I asked whether this criterion had changed, and the only response was that no, it had not changed. Of course not all editors did do the right thing, and it's fine to re-examine the relationships and adjust them where they are wrong. However it's not fine arbitrarily to discount the productivity/ longevity criterion for doing so, since this is the one criterion laid out in the guidelines. Some refinement of this guideline along the lines you suggest may be desirable. This is probably less significant than some other things in the RFC/RFV process right now though. _______________________________________________ MusicBrainz-style mailing list MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
