Hello,
On 20-08-14 16:23, Calvin Walton wrote:
On Sun, 2014-08-03 at 21:12 +0200, Per Starbäck wrote:
Earlier a fictitious name like Mickey Mouse should be sorted as
Mickey Mouse, and not Mouse, Mickey as if it was a real person,
but RFC 203 aimed to change that.
See
Hello,
On 10-07-14 11:18, Alex Mauer wrote:
On 07/10/2014 08:30 AM, jesus2099 wrote:
Alex Mauer wrote
If it looks awkward, that means the browser (or whatever is displaying
the text) needs its text rendering fixed. I don’t think it’s the
responsibility of Musicbrainz editors to work around
Hello,
On 04/15/2014 09:59 AM, Staffan Vilcans wrote:
th1rtyf0ur skrev:
The issue here is that I find it difficult to mark something as official
that has literally only one (or very few) hand-made copy, given directly
to another band member, recording engineer, close friend, etc., not
Hello,
On 03/23/2014 03:38 PM, Ulrich Klauer wrote:
Rachel Dwight
We recently added the option to add additional attributes to works,
one of which was JASRAC work ID. As many of you all know, several
other collection societies have repertoires of their own and special
IDs for works. Below
On 03/17/2014 02:17 PM, jesus2099 wrote:
Very good korean music DB, example : artist
http://www.maniadb.com/artist/102990 album
http://www.maniadb.com/album/199947
+1
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
Hello!
On 03/12/2014 03:23 PM, Marko wrote:
Sure (if people have entered them) but what does that has to do with
this proposal?
Number of discs does not say what kind of packaging is used. 2 CD’s
could be in separate single disc jewel cases just as well.
But then there will usually be
On 01/27/2014 07:39 PM, drsaunde wrote:
Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote
Not really - proposals pass if they're not vetoed. kuno specifically said
he wasn't vetoing this - I'm not sure about drsaunde so let's wait a bit
and see if he clarifies it :)
Don't proposals require at least a +1 from
Hi,
On 01/23/2014 07:07 PM, lixobix wrote:
I'd put something like this in the guidelines:
A Mini-Album (or Mini-LP) is a release that is in between EP and Album in
terms of number of tracks and length. The number of tracks is around 7-9,
and the length varies from around 20-35 mins. There is
Hello,
On 01/23/2014 02:05 AM, Alex Mauer wrote:
On 1/22/2014 10:03 AM, Kuno Woudt wrote:
Hello,
On 01/22/2014 04:33 PM, Mihai Spinei wrote:
Got a couple of +1s for mini-albums, so I'd suggest to add just them for
now, will debate maxi-singles later. RFV
I'm not convinced difference
Hello Style Council!
On 01/20/2014 06:20 PM, Alex Mauer wrote:
On 01/20/2014 04:04 AM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
Digital Media is effectively Download - but having USB and slotMusic
(microSD) under it makes it much less obvious. The current hierarchy
never went through style.
On 09/06/2013 12:25 AM, Tom Crocker wrote:
Hi Mike
Good question and I'm not sure if I know the answer. While it's possible
that the difference in guidance is some legacy of NGS, it's also
possible that SPY is not seen as an error, because it's still
capitalised so it's still an acronym.
Hello,
On 08/27/2013 10:13 PM, LordSputnik wrote:
So, Caller#6 brought up the issue of things like (bonus track) in the
title. This isn't really ETI (it doesn't distinguish anything), but under
the proposal it would get copied into the recording title.
My suggestion would be to add this on
On 08/23/2013 02:13 PM, lixobix wrote:
Tom Crocker wrote
I've no idea how you construct a good guide, unless it either
has to do with being 'named' or by listing a set of things to move, and
keep all others.
I think your right. That said, as I suggested earlier, I would be happy for
On 08/16/2013 03:31 AM, Duke Yin wrote:
Ticket: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-237
Proposed Change to Style/Titles:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/index.php?title=User%3AYindesu%2FStyle%2FTitlesdiff=64184oldid=64183
The way words are presented on the front cover artwork of a
On 07/06/2013 11:41 AM, Tom Crocker wrote:
You make a good point that we should be thinking about a video recording
entity that's separate to the audio recording. That would be the correct
way to structure the database
Why do you need a separate entity?
I think it is interesting and important
Hello,
On 03/19/2013 10:18 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2013/3/19 Ben Ockmore ben.s...@gmail.com mailto:ben.s...@gmail.com
I agree that something should be said about Primary types. There
could perhaps be something on when to use the EP type? Or perhaps
some of the more
On 03/19/2013 10:55 AM, pabouk wrote:
I missed the discussion of redefining the recordings. Is it this one?
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User_talk:Reosarevok/Recording_Issues
We have never really defined recordings, so I don't consider this a
redefinition, this is the first time we define what
Hello,
On 03/07/2013 07:44 PM, caller#6 wrote:
On 03/07/2013 09:54 AM, Kuno Woudt wrote:
If the track is not clearly credited on the back cover tracklisting, I
consider that implicitly credited to the release artist -- although I
would prefer it if the track and release artist credit fields
Hello,
On 03/08/2013 01:53 AM, Ross Tyler wrote:
Sides are not always lettered (e.g. A, B, ...).
Sides are sometimes numbered (e.g. 1, 2, ...) or named (e.g.
Black/White, This/That, ...).
Side names are similar to disc names for multi-disc CD releases. The
database currently has no support
Hello,
On 03/08/2013 10:36 AM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2013/3/8 Kuno Woudt k...@frob.nl mailto:k...@frob.nl
Hello,
On 03/08/2013 01:53 AM, Ross Tyler wrote:
Sides are not always lettered (e.g. A, B, ...).
Sides are sometimes numbered (e.g. 1, 2, ...) or named (e.g
On 03/07/2013 11:15 AM, Sean Burke wrote:
Per feedback in the #musicbrainz IRC channel, I have drafted an
amendment to the existing guidelines.
Wiki page: http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Leftmostcat/Style/Release
+1
-- kuno / warp.
___
Hello,
On 03/07/2013 05:10 PM, caller#6 wrote:
On 03/06/2013 07:32 AM, Kuno Woudt wrote:
On 03/06/2013 03:09 PM, Sean Burke wrote:
JIRA ticket: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-197
Yes, track artists should always be whatever appears in the artist
column at digital retailers [1
Hello,
On 03/06/2013 03:09 PM, Sean Burke wrote:
JIRA ticket: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-197
Currently, the guidelines are silent on the following situation:
Artist B records a track.
Artist A remixes the track and puts it out on a release.
The release is credited to
Hello,
On 01/17/2013 12:00 PM, CARO REPETTO, RAFAEL wrote:
1. The material we are working with comes from China, so they are
released in Chinese. However, we want to have, together with the Chinese
original data (in hanzi), the transliterated version of all them in
pinyin (not the translated
Hello,
This proposal is for adding a Digital Download option in the medium
format list, under the Digital Media entry. (so at the same level as
USB Flash Drive).
I will quote what Alastair said on the ticket:
There is no explicit medium format for digital downloads. They seem to
have to be
On 2013 Jan 8, at 0:48, Ben Ockmore wrote:
I agree we should flatten the hierarchy there rather than introduce a new
sub-type. Perhaps we could rename digital media to digital download instead?
I'd be happy with that.
-- kuno / warp.
___
On 2013 Jan 8, at 1:00, Frederik Freso S. Olesen wrote:
Den 08-01-2013 00:48, Ben Ockmore skrev:
I agree we should flatten the hierarchy there rather than introduce a
new sub-type. Perhaps we could rename digital media to digital download
instead?
What is a non-digital download?
Digital
On 01/03/2013 11:52 PM, Ben Ockmore wrote:
I would say so - I don't see any reason why not, they can be copyrighted
just as much as recordings...
I'm not sure a work as we use it in musicbrainz is a copyrightable
thing, it seems to abstract.
You cannot copyright ideas, only expressions of
Hello,
On 12/21/2012 08:11 PM, Andrew Conkling wrote:
Sorry, I mean where's the guideline for non-classical releases?
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Style/Release#Artist
-- kuno / warp.
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
Hello,
In the past few weeks/months we had some discussion about recording
entities, in particular trying to define what a recording is, born out
of the discussions on when recordings can be merged and should be kept
seperate.
I assume most of you are familiar with this ongoing discussion,
Hello,
On 2012 Dec 16, at 17:47, refresh_daemon wrote:
I also think that we need to discuss the usage of sino-Korean characters. I
personally believe that we should retain all sino-Korean characters where
used in the original titles and not replace them with Hangul characters, nor
follow
Hello,
On 11/15/2012 09:35 AM, LordSputnik wrote:
Ah, but if a rule is only good sometimes, then it can't really be a rule :P
The problem with ISRCs is that they're not consistent, not easily verifiable
and error-prone. Assignment of ISRCs is left to each registered issuer, so
there will be
Hello,
On 11/05/2012 01:56 AM, caller#6 wrote:
It seems clear that some people want to track the minutia of
audio-quality data. That's awesome.
And it seems clear that some people don't. Some of us primarily want a
place to store personnel-level metadata.
Why are we trying to do those two
Hello,
On 11/05/2012 12:25 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
Alex Mauer suggested Recording Groups earlier. This does not solve all
issues, but it seems to be a step in the right direction.
I would be opposed to this. I've explained why in my e-mail from a few
minutes ago [1].
-- kuno / warp.
On 10/31/2012 06:29 PM, Ben Ockmore wrote:
Expected Expiration Date for RFC: Wednesday, 7th November 2012
This proposal is designed to improve the guidelines on merging
recordings, at https://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Style/Recording.
It is felt that the current guidelines are too vague, and
+1
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
On 07/02/2012 04:25 PM, Calvin Walton wrote:
On Mon, 2012-07-02 at 17:08 +0300, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
Since we all seem to agree that the high data quality voting changes
are a pain, I'm proposing to just uncouple the two things, and have
quality be just a mark of that. Although the
Hello,
On 06/29/2012 05:52 PM, practik wrote:
jesus2099 wrote
NEED as they contain each track times, like on Audio CDs.
See discussion in http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-2416
+1
Is there any difference between VCD menu tracks etc. and [silence] tracks in
terms of actual
Hello,
On 06/29/2012 09:52 AM, jesus2099 wrote:
It would be a pity to not use those valable TOCs or to not mark VCDs as VCDs
just because of a few exceptions.
Besides that, here is what you can do anyway :
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18161677 (althought I don’t think this should be
Hello,
On 06/29/2012 12:00 PM, jesus2099 wrote:
Yes, the free-text track numbers would make it more acceptable to allow
discids on video cds than it has been in the past. But I still don't
think forcing the tracklist to match the disc is a good idea for Video
CD or DVDs.
The valuable thing
Hello,
On 06/28/2012 02:58 PM, jesus2099 wrote:
NEED as they contain each track times, like on Audio CDs.
See discussion in http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-2416
+1
If we would allow discids on video cds, that means we get a lot of
nonsense tracks, because most video cds have menu
Hello,
On 06/28/2012 04:55 PM, jesus2099 wrote:
Not in my experience, all my commercial VCDs (not made by myself) put menu
stuff in the starting data track (you can store videos in data track, I know
I built some VCDs).
They paid attention to put only those interesting titles as video tracks
On 25/06/12 20:35, Johannes Weißl wrote:
So why not using Song for all popular works? It could be the first
item on the list or even be selected by default.
+1
-- warp.
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
On 21/06/12 15:59, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
So, I think everyone agrees that the current High Quality option sucks
horribly, is only good to annoy editors and should be avoided like the
plague. Our whole quality system needs a re-think, really, but until
that is done, I can see three
Hello,
On 23/06/12 16:28, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
Would you oppose having HQ do everything as default *except* for
lacking autoedits? (that is, making capitalisation changes and the
like not autoedits)
In general I think having all these conditions be different for
different edit
On 09/06/12 01:17, Ryan Torchia wrote:
Honestly, I think absolutely mimicking the release is unnecessary here.
The point of doing this seems to be simply to communicate side breaks
where they exist, which we don't do now. Standardizing that to A/B/C/D
is sufficient, and is consistent with how
On 11/06/12 15:22, Alex Mauer wrote:
On 06/11/2012 04:58 AM, Kuno Woudt wrote:
I don't we should try to use the free-form track numbers to indicate
side breaks. MusicBrainz should get proper support for representing
medium sides, we shouldn't try to force this information into other
fields
On 08/06/12 15:01, Ross Tyler wrote:
On Jun 8, 2012 4:10 AM, Calvin Walton calvin.wal...@kepstin.ca
mailto:calvin.wal...@kepstin.ca wrote:
For reference, vgmdb.net http://vgmdb.net labels this image type as
Tray. (I have their
full list of types at
On 09/06/12 00:59, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
2012/6/7 Alex Mauer ha...@hawkesnest.net mailto:ha...@hawkesnest.net
On 06/07/2012 03:58 PM, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
What about when there are more than 9 tracks on one side?
Shouldn't we
insert a 0 and use A01..A09, A10 at
Hello,
We've received a request to add links to fanart.tv to musicbrainz. IMO
fanart complements our cover art archive stuff nicely, especially
because they have high-res artist images for a well defined purpose. So
I would be in favour.
It's great that their site understands musicbrainz
On 07/06/12 14:51, Maurits Meulenbelt wrote:
Hi,
I came across this ( http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/CAA-11 )
ticket by Philip Jägenstedt to add the inlay (the inside of the back
image in a jewel case, behind the tray with the cd) to the list of
possible cover art types. It's marked
Hello,
On 06/06/12 13:31, lixobix wrote:
This has been bugging me for a while. I accept that not all sites can be
accessed from all countries, but when should we use [worldwide] and when the
country in which the site is based?
Some stores are country specific (amazon, itunes) so the answer
Hello,
On 04/06/12 22:53, Alex Mauer wrote:
On 06/04/2012 02:48 PM, Staffan Vilcans wrote:
The way to credit mashups (a mix of two or more different tracks) is not
consistent. At
http://musicbrainz.org/release/93cfdc1b-b7b5-496f-aab9-aa46bf891601 the
remixer is used as artist while on
On 05/06/12 10:24, Kuno Woudt wrote:
If they're credited like that on the release, the artist credits for the
track should not deviate from that. For the recording however I think
it makes sense to always credit that to the remixer/mashup artist, and I
would support a guideline which
Hello,
On 05/06/12 14:34, lixobix wrote:
I don't think having them as secondary type works. You couldn't have
mini-album + live for e.g.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under_a_Blood_Red_Sky
Why not? you can select only one primary type, but you can select
multiple secondary types.
-- kuno /
Hello,
On 04/06/12 16:34, lixobix wrote:
I've recently noticed some users adding the show date and country in the
release date and country fields. I'm aware that the rules state these fields
should be left blank if unknown, but in my opinion such a policy is becoming
increasingly useless as
Hello,
On 31/05/12 23:10, symphonick wrote:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Proposal:Style/Language/Swedish
http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-116
Can you make the english translation as close as possible to the
original? Currently the example and the link to wikipedia are missing.
--
On 27/05/12 21:59, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
Moved there, added a redirect from the other
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Style/Classical/Language/English
Can you add a link on http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Style ? IMO /Style
should list all official guidelines.
-- kuno / warp.
On 28/05/12 17:27, Alex Mauer wrote:
On 5/28/2012 9:39 AM, refresh_daemon wrote:
Or can we just append Mini-Album to the EP primary type to have an EP /
Mini-Album primary type and just put both types in there? For the most
part, I've been categorizing all the mini-albums I encounter as EPs
Hello,
On 30/05/12 17:07, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Kuno Woudtk...@frob.nl wrote:
On 27/05/12 21:59, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
Moved there, added a redirect from the other
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Style/Classical/Language/English
Can you
Hello,
If the cover lists specific artists for each track, the listed
artist should be placed in the Artist Credit field. If there
is a main credit for the entire release, use that.
This seems to say that if there are both artists listed on each track
and a main credit for the release,
Hello,
On 24/05/12 13:26, Per Øyvind Øygard wrote:
Anyway, as to the subject of Mini-Albums, I definitely think there's a
good case for adding it as a primary type.
What is the benefit of having it as a primary type over a secondary
type? To me a mini-album seems like a particular kind of
Hello,
On 21/05/12 19:52, practik wrote:
I guess I'm wondering whether the Reasoning section that
started this whole thread even belongs on the Artist Intent page at all,
since it really has nothing to do with Artist Intent. Does anyone know a
better place for it? (I haven't noticed one.)
I
Hello,
On 22/05/12 17:50, practik wrote:
Kuno Woudt wrote
On 21/05/12 19:52, practik wrote:
I guess I'm wondering whether the Reasoning section that
started this whole thread even belongs on the Artist Intent page at all,
since it really has nothing to do with Artist Intent. Does anyone
On 18/05/12 17:21, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
Non-music spoken word releases (from
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Release_Group/Type#Spokenword ) is
magnificently non-descriptive. Does anyone know if it's intended to be
used for spokenword, the art form, or for spoken word stuff, as in,
Hello,
On 17/05/12 15:37, monxton wrote:
I'm currently struggling with how to vote on
http://musicbrainz.org/edit/17651606. To my mind this is pointless
duplication of a very well-defined set of recordings, and I'm inclined
to vote no, even though it seems harsh.
The editor has not added
Hello,
On 17/05/12 17:28, Alex Mauer wrote:
On 05/17/2012 09:44 AM, Kuno Woudt wrote:
AFAIK we also keep mono and stereo mixes separate (e.g. the Beatles),
this is a similar situation.
But isn’t that more because a lot of stereo mixes are actually
substantially different and not just
On 07/05/12 10:57, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
Hi!
We have a problem currently with rap mixtapes, since they're not
really compilations, but they're not really standard albums either;
they tend to include new music, sometimes but not always over re-used
beats, and to not be included in
Hello,
On 07/05/12 13:11, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
What about compilations with a previously unreleased track?
if the majority of the release consists of unaltered, previously
released recordings, I still think of it as a compilation.
-- kuno / warp.
Hello,
On 03/05/12 10:58, Nikki wrote:
Kuno Woudt wrote:
(picard used to be able to use the sort name as a translated name, which
would've been a reason to leave the comma off to prevent picard from
swapping names which are already in the correct order -- does picard
still do
Hello,
On 02/05/12 12:28, caller#6 wrote:
So, my questions to you (the list): Are any of these items particularly
important to you? Do some seem to be not-worth-the-effort? Am I wrong in
any of my assessments?
The entire sort-name field is not important to me, so I don't
particularly care
Hello,
On 27/04/12 10:07, caller#6 wrote:
On 04/27/2012 05:28 AM, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
a sequence of several [songs] played one after the other
Maybe a sequence of several [previously released recordings] played one
after the other?
In electronic music it is not uncommon for
On 24/04/12 12:25, Alex Mauer wrote:
With the veto of the most recent RFV for this proposal, I have made some
changes to the proposal to hopefully correct the problems brought up by
warp.
It now suggests using the track credits on the release, with the note
that most classical releases do
Hello,
On 11/04/12 13:59, Ian Weller wrote:
I ran into a bunch of TC-prefixed codes listed under the ISRC field on
MusicBrainz last night and after some research learned that these are
not officially-created ISRCs but are ones distributed by TuneCore with
the same syntax and format.
After
On 30/03/12 14:00, jesus2099 wrote:
Hello,
OK, as style leaders agreed and as the clock is ticking as we have extended
the duration of both the RFC and RFV quite too long, I think this RFV [1]
should pass, it will allow some editing and having some reference to tell
editors that is more as
Hello,
On 02/04/12 17:23, Andii Hughes wrote:
Where I think things get fuzzy is if you have a title X on an album,
but a compilation lists X (album version) (i.e. there is not
cross-release agreement). Here I think (album version) is
superfluous as its the 'standard' version. Thus I would
Hello,
On 29/03/12 15:52, symphonick wrote:
Music: COIL - COIL looks like a typical artist name to me? And for
the other tracks (2, 6, 9-11) you could argue that it's the only credit
in the tracklist?
BTW are you sure the classical music guideline should apply to this release?
No, I wasn't
On 23/03/12 13:08, Alex Mauer wrote:
On 03/23/2012 12:40 PM, Kuno Woudt wrote:
Yes. I'm saying that requirement should be lifted. That artist credits
shouldn't be mandatory.
I think that would complicate tagging (i.e. Picard) and is a major
change to how MB works, to little/no real
On 23/03/12 12:29, Alex Mauer wrote:
On 03/23/2012 12:15 PM, Kuno Woudt wrote:
So, if you think each release and track in the database should have an
artist credit, then it seems we have different ideas about what an
artist credit is. For me it is something which may not exist for
particular
Hello,
On 22/03/12 12:52, caller#6 wrote:
I guess I don't understand what a credit is in this context.
Presumably, most releases (of any genre) will give both composer and
performer information /somewhere/. Where is the artist credit?
On the release.
Typically, releases on CD have a back
Hello,
On 19/03/12 23:09, practik wrote:
Not I, but I can tell you what the Chicago Manual of Style says:
The abbreviation op. (opus; plural opp. or opera) is set in roman and
usually lowercased. An abbreviation designating a catalog of a particular
composer’s works is always capitalized
Hello,
On 02/03/12 04:01, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
Ok, it makes sense. I agree that ARs can't be avoided and that
entering Artist Credits is no excuse for not entering ARs. But I have
still another question: what means artist credit outside classical?
How is it different from ARs? Why did
Hello,
On 16/02/12 16:19, caller#6 wrote:
My plan has been to re-purpose
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Classical_Music as a CSG portal or start
page which will include when does the CSG apply (in whole or in part)?.
It may be a good idea to have more information about classical outside
of the
Hello,
On 17/02/12 15:39, symphonick wrote:
If there is no clear track artist credit, use the composer. Note that
that classical releases are very rarely credited.
I don't see the point, it just sounds confusing to me. Could you please
give an example of a clear track artist credit for a
Hello,
On 16/02/12 12:13, Johannes Weißl wrote:
this is the RFV for proposal 345, to extend the License Relationship to
recordings. This is necessary to specify the license for standalone
recordings or for mixed-license releases.
The proposal is to replace the current wiki page [1] with this
Hello,
On 16/02/12 12:28, symphonick wrote:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Proposal:CSG2012/Recording/Artist
It isn't clear to me what the final location of this guideline
will be. Considering this is the first of probably many classical
guidelines, I expect this should be something like
Hello,
On 09/02/12 07:47, Nicolás Tamargo de Eguren wrote:
In some cases, especially for videogame music, the official credits
for music both in covers and in official databases like JASRAC are not
given to people, but to publishers (see [1] where the second line of
credits at the bottom
Hello,
On 09/02/12 09:07, Frederic Da Vitoria wrote:
In your answer you did not use the composer AR at all. Was this intentional?
I do not personally use relationships much, so they're not usually
my concern ;)
For the composer relationship I wouldn't enter it if I didn't know who the
On 07/02/12 06:06, symphonick wrote:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Proposal:CSG2012/Recording/Artist
This is overdue for RFV there hasn't been any replies in 5 days in the
RFC thread.
This RFV will expire on Thursday, 9th of February.
In general I do not object to this proposal. But the
Hello,
On 07/02/12 10:14, symphonick wrote:
2012/2/7 Kuno Woudt k...@frob.nl mailto:k...@frob.nl
On 07/02/12 06:06, symphonick wrote:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Proposal:CSG2012/Recording/Artist
This is overdue for RFV there hasn't been any replies in 5 days
On 03/02/12 17:44, symphonick wrote:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Proposal:CSG2012/Tracklist/Artist
I think there is consensus about using composer as artist in classical
tracklists. comments?
It is unclear to me what is proposed here. Tracklists don't have an
artist field. Is this about
Hello,
On 06/02/12 10:37, symphonick wrote:
2012/2/6 Kuno Woudt k...@frob.nl mailto:k...@frob.nl
On 03/02/12 17:44, symphonick wrote:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Proposal:CSG2012/Tracklist/Artist
I think there is consensus about using composer as artist
Hello,
On 06/02/12 12:18, Rupert Swarbrick wrote:
Kuno Woudtk...@frob.nl writes:
So this would be the first part of CSG to be come an official style
guideline? If so, this page is not ready to be part of the guidelines.
The artist credits for a track should be whoever is credited for that
Hello,
On 02/02/12 05:58, MeinDummy wrote:
Of course all these sources do not provide exactly the same audio but this
does not mean that they cannot be the same release.
We are not even sure if we want to keep original and remastered tracks
separate. So why should we differentiate between
Hello,
On 31/01/12 03:49, MeinDummy wrote:
As a side note: I think we need to update the guidelines with respect to
netlabel releases, too. If the same music is released at X different
netlabels we'd end up with X identical releases according to the current
guidelines.
Look at
Hello,
On 24/01/12 07:06, Wieland Hoffmann wrote:
I'm pretty sure Bandcamp helps with at least manufacturing, promotion,
PR and distribution. You might argue about the first three because
they're Bandcamp is not the only one who might participate in them, but
distribution is (at least for
Hello,
On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 01:07:51 +0200, Aurélien Mino a.m...@free.fr wrote:
Last.fm case is a bit more complex.
For a long time we weren't linking to Last.fm for reasons stated in the
not-official-but-still-applied guideline What_Not_To_Link_To [2].
Then the Social Networking Relationship
Hello,
On 25/07/11 18:35, symphonick wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 18:19:42 +0200, Jim Patterson
musicbrainz.r...@ncf.ca wrote:
How prevalent is the use of paper (not cardboard) sleeves, anyways? In
my experience, they're non-existent for official releases. Cardboard
sleeves are quite
Hello,
I think I've given my view on this topic in earlier threads,
but just in case anyone is interested I'll try to articulate it again :)
In general I do not object to all the normalizing we tend to do, so
would support proposals which re-introduce our existing guidelines
for track and
Hello,
On 21/07/11 11:31, Ryan Torchia wrote:
This just doesn't seem like an improvement. The problem is that (feat.
Y) is basically a comment, but is neither part of the track title nor
part of the artist name. It doesn't fit comfortably in either
location. But Track (feat. Y) still
1 - 100 of 381 matches
Mail list logo
