[mb-style] RFC: Artist 'is managed by' AR
Pretty simple, most artists have a manager and we can't currently represent this in MB. It should be a link between a person and an artist/group. I'm not sure what else to say. any opinions on this? Now that I think about it, aren't some artists managed by a company? I'm not really sure how a company can be represented in MB. Anyway... Cheers, Matt Howe ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFC: Artist 'is managed by' AR
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Matt Howe wrote: Pretty simple, most artists have a manager and we can't currently represent this in MB. It should be a link between a person and an artist/group. I'm not sure what else to say. any opinions on this? I feel this is moving into the 'legalities' of the music business rather than just recording information about the music or artists. Artist management can and does change over time, often due to legal disputes. It wouldn't be good to have out of date information such as: X is managed by Y When there is a court battle between them. Steve (inhouseuk) ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] How to handle band/artist name changes
DonRedman wrote: Heh, what about that simple suggestion: We could make a wiki page and collect all these artist there and the decisions that led to the state they are in. This would not be a guideline yet, but maybe a step towards one. Well if we don't have a way to relate them we sure a heck better get something in the wiki that describes why each artist is different because there's going to be alot of confusion. People enter stuff as they have on the CD in hand, afterall how many edits end up being a discussion over accuracy on the artist page vs accuracy on the CD case? Personally I like keeping all my music under the artist that makes most sense to me (Prince is still Prince in my opinion), but it would be nice to have an relationship link to click on to get to any other names the band may have had. But problem with a wiki as a solution is that it only gets edited when somebody remembers to put the resolution of the vote in there; if nobody contests keeping them seperate when albums are entered under the new name you could say the consensus is to keep them seperate. But as nobody made waves it's not likely that it would be entered in to the wiki and somebody may come by later to merge them saying no precident was set (according to the wiki). I still think we need something more tangible than a wiki page listing the consensus on every artist name change, or even an annotation on the page mentioning the former or new name. Maybe I wasn't clear before, the AR doesn't have to actaully do anything now, it would have the same power as Performs as but would signify a different change where an artist changed name to something else at some point (and as a bounus it provides a convienient link to that artist). And we can still vote on certain merges that we don't think should be done, or certain merges we think should be done. Then maybe someday in the future we can utilize that AR to provide more cool functionality when we have the programmers and testers to deal with it. -Dustin (Kerensky97) -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/How-to-handle-band-artist-name-changes-tf2382488s2885.html#a6740588 Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] Fwd: Purevolume URL Relationship Missing
as i said in the thread that missed the mailing list.. I am for the addition of adding purevolume.com AR/links to artists (not to mention I've requested something identical a while ago but never followed through on mb-style - http://bugs.musicbrainz.org/ticket/1478 ) tomorrow will mark one week since the request on mb-style. should maybe we start some kind of RFV? Lukáš Lalinský-2 wrote: This was mistakenly posted only to Nabble, so forwarding it also here: http://www.nabble.com/Purevolume-URL-Relationship-Missing-tf2383447s2885.html -Lukáš ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Fwd%3A-Purevolume-URL-Relationship-Missing-tf2383762s2885.html#a6743700 Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
[mb-style] artist type: project
Was there a resolution on this issue? If so, I'd like to include this in the next server release... -- --ruaok Somewhere in Texas a village is *still* missing its idiot. Robert Kaye -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --http://mayhem-chaos.net ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] artist type: project
We need it badly. I saw a lot of artists that could fit in this category. On 10/10/06, Robert Kaye [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Was there a resolution on this issue? If so, I'd like to include this in the next server release... -- --ruaok Somewhere in Texas a village is *still* missing its idiot. Robert Kaye -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --http://mayhem-chaos.net ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] artist type: project
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006, Robert Kaye wrote: Was there a resolution on this issue? If so, I'd like to include this in the next server release... I believe it was agreed to add it and it was being tested on the staging server before implementation. If I remember, it was accidently included in one of the mini-releases and backed out because it broke the lucene search. Steve ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] artist type: project
On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 11:56:04PM +0200, pankkake wrote: We need it badly. I saw a lot of artists that could fit in this category. I'd really like to see it, too. There are a bunch of releases attributed to projects on the FAX (http://www.discogs.com/label/Fax+%2B49-69%2F450464) label that it'd be appropriate for. Check the edit history for Virtual Vices, Sultan, Silence, etc. If you're bored.. Ryan ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFV: Transl(iteration-ation) AR (Resurrection).
I thought I'd change this to RFV since there doesn't seem to be any comment. Might as well at least get the discussion portion of the process out of the way (and I wanted to test how editing post titles would work on nabble/mailinglists). -Dustin (Kerensky97) Kerensky97 wrote: BTW, I still like using Alternate as the release status. Then it might be possible to add a setting where people can choose to show alternate discs or not. Plus it's ambiguous enough you can stick a few other virtual releases in there or if we think of something in the future that isn't official or bootleg and just needs to be shuffled to the back till NGS. Kerensky97 wrote: The only thing left over was what release status to call these duplicates so we could group them seperate from the official releases till NGS comes about, Alternate or Virtual? And then RFV to finish off the issue. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/RFV%3A--Transl%28iteration-ation%29-AR-%28Resurrection%29.-tf2390960s2885.html#a6746841 Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] artist type: project
i never felt it was resolved. i feel that group is a plural, person is a singular, but project is pretty vague. i agree with lauri's comments in the original discussion that if we're to include project, we need collaboration, band, person and group, and all their definitions need to be rock solid (which i feel is impossible) to avoid edit wars. personally i think it's unnecesary. some bands have a key figure who orchestrated the whole thing, but i feel they're still groups, just with only one static member. what about things like NIN where it is him in the studio, a full band (group) live? i don't see what's wrong with just having them as groups, and then showing who the main member is by using 'additional' flags on all the others, if you think there's good reason for this, but even that can be iffy! On 10/10/06, Robert Kaye [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Was there a resolution on this issue? If so, I'd like to include this in the next server release... -- --ruaok Somewhere in Texas a village is *still* missing its idiot. Robert Kaye -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --http://mayhem-chaos.net ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] artist type: project
If this is what I think it is I'm all for it (NOT the solo project discussion right?). But it's been a while since it was discussed and I can't seem to find the resolution. How exactly is it being implemented and how will it affect the grouping of artists? Is there a link to the test server where this was running for us to play with? I don't want to be a pest but a quick recap might help forgetful people like me and people new to MB in the last few months. -Dustin (Kerensky97) Ryan McCabe wrote: On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 11:56:04PM +0200, pankkake wrote: We need it badly. I saw a lot of artists that could fit in this category. I'd really like to see it, too. There are a bunch of releases attributed to projects on the FAX (http://www.discogs.com/label/Fax+%2B49-69%2F450464) label that it'd be appropriate for. Check the edit history for Virtual Vices, Sultan, Silence, etc. If you're bored.. Ryan ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/artist-type%3A-project-tf2419753s2885.html#a6746976 Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] artist type: project
Discussion starts on the July mbstyle - first post by Beth, second from me: http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-style/2006-July/003269.ht ml Joan - Original Message - From: Kerensky97 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 11:33 PM Subject: Re: [mb-style] artist type: project If this is what I think it is I'm all for it (NOT the solo project discussion right?). But it's been a while since it was discussed and I can't seem to find the resolution. How exactly is it being implemented and how will it affect the grouping of artists? Is there a link to the test server where this was running for us to play with? I don't want to be a pest but a quick recap might help forgetful people like me and people new to MB in the last few months. -Dustin (Kerensky97) Ryan McCabe wrote: On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 11:56:04PM +0200, pankkake wrote: We need it badly. I saw a lot of artists that could fit in this category. I'd really like to see it, too. There are a bunch of releases attributed to projects on the FAX (http://www.discogs.com/label/Fax+%2B49-69%2F450464) label that it'd be appropriate for. Check the edit history for Virtual Vices, Sultan, Silence, etc. If you're bored.. Ryan ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/artist-type%3A-project-tf2419753s2885.html#a6746976 Sent from the Musicbrainz - Style mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] artist type: project
My 2 cents are that the issue of types probably needs to be fleshed out better. As I recall, collaborations were not received as positively as projects, partly getting stuck on a matter of definitions. But it's a slippery slope adding one new type at a time Nonethless, I'm not opposed to project. I'd merely like to see collaboration as well (and I have a formal definition floating around if we can't find it in the mail archives). ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Re: [mb-style] RFC: Artist 'is managed by' AR
On Wednesday 11 October 2006 2:14 am, Steve Wyles wrote: I feel this is moving into the 'legalities' of the music business rather than just recording information about the music or artists. That was my initial thought too but you could argue the same point about the 'was involved with' and 'has spouse' ARs. It wouldn't be good to have out of date information I don't understand this objection, relationships change all the time that's why we have start and end times for them. Matt Howe (mdhowe) ___ Musicbrainz-style mailing list Musicbrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
