i remove my +1, count me as *-1* now that it clearly says to changing text of
tracklists from what they are printed as (“ft.”, “featuring”, “featurin’”,
etc.) into “feat.” (we can now avoid this since AC).
-
PATATE12
jesus2099
GOLD MASTER KING
FAKE E-MAIL ADDRESS
--
View this
2013/12/9 jesus2099 hta3s836gzac...@jetable.org
i remove my +1, count me as *-1* now that it clearly says to changing text
of
tracklists from what they are printed as (“ft.”, “featuring”, “featurin’”,
etc.) into “feat.” (we can now avoid this since AC).
I disagree: IMO you can't -1 on a
So make it an “abstain”, as if i had never been here. :)
-
PATATE12
jesus2099
GOLD MASTER KING
FAKE E-MAIL ADDRESS
--
View this message in context:
http://musicbrainz.1054305.n4.nabble.com/RFC-Featured-artists-clarification-tp4659960p4660295.html
Sent from the MusicBrainz - Style
This can move to RFV by now I'd say.
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
I agree that you might as well not standardize abbreviations either. But
what does this leave for the guideline? I can't come up with a case where
it would still be relevant. I'm sure there are cases, but I would
appreciate an example if anyone has one. It seems like only a very specific
type of
No, no. The idea is to clarify that we *should* standardise the
abbreviations.
On 7 Dec 2013 16:25, August Janse august.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
I agree that you might as well not standardize abbreviations either. But
what does this leave for the guideline? I can't come up with a case where
it
Oh, I misread. Never mind then.
___
MusicBrainz-style mailing list
MusicBrainz-style@lists.musicbrainz.org
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
I've made a few small changes here: removing the classical stuff, making
clear that abbreviations of featuring follow the guideline too, and
changing that if they fit into 1 sentence because I had to read it too
many times to understand it and that's a bad sign:
Yes, it should be removed:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/Style/Classical/Release/Title does not
mention feat. or featured any more.
Let's just remove that bullet point then.
Why? This is the first clear definition of featured I ever found :-)
I think that definition seems to include cases
2013/11/29 August Janse august.ja...@gmail.com
If the classical part isn't true, then clearly it should be removed. I'm
not really clear on what goes in that case so if anyone feels like
replacing it I guess that would be good? Or should it just be removed?
Yes, it should be removed:
Den 29-11-2013 17:54, Ross Tyler skrev:
IMO, there is nothing special about this Artist Credit join phrase.
As I understand it, the historical reasoning for the guidelines is to
standardise the most common feat. phrase, so e.g. taggers and other
data consumers can special case that.
I'm
Hello,
It’s good to say *don’t change* stuff that differs from featuring to feat.
as said in this wiki page.
*+1* as this proposal is limiting the frequency of this search/replace, but
I would go further and drop the rule totally.
You could add on the top to apply the usual Japanese release
On 11/29/2013 07:24 AM, jesus2099 wrote:
*+1* as this proposal is limiting the frequency of this search/replace, but
I would go further and drop the rule totally.
Yes, our featured artists guidance should be swept into the dustbin of
history.
IMO, there is nothing special about this Artist
If the classical part isn't true, then clearly it should be removed. I'm
not really clear on what goes in that case so if anyone feels like
replacing it I guess that would be good? Or should it just be removed?
The opening paragraph should probably be rewritten as well.
2013/11/29 Ross Tyler
Expected expiration date: December 1
Bug tracker: http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/STYLE-270
Wiki proposal:
http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/User:Tularion/Featured_artists_clarification
Forum discussion: forums.musicbrainz.org/viewtopic.php?pid=23765
Featured artists
+1. Standardising those would be meh.
Only somewhat related, but the “(feat.)” is used in MusicBrainz as part of
the Classical Style Guide to indicate performers, as the composers are
stored in the artist field. This is separate from this guideline, don't try
to “correct” those! is no longer
16 matches
Mail list logo
