#musicbrainz

but almost always, tri_marianaaf, whne the release you see is the wrong order of tracks, then ti's you got the wrong version, not that the release is wrong :)

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005U190 and discogs have it wrong http://www.discogs.com/Lil-Bow-Wow-Doggy-Bag/re...

probably there are two versions with differntorder of tracks. it happens all the time with releases

like in us/uk or japan or eu

same "release" differnt order on the tracks +- track or bonus

but in amazon there's the wrong tracklist and in the same link you can see the back cover so I'm guessing it«'s the same release but with track order error (on amazon)

(same barcode too)

odd that the amz tracklist doesn't match the back cover

but whatever, at least it's legit

what do yo ueman "wrong trackorder" wrong accordign to what? the link? thne change the link, worng accordign to their backcover ? then we can't do anything :)

they probably use the same image for bot versinos so one is right and one has the wrong image¨

happens all the time

hey wizz what is you oppinion on http://musicbrainz.org/edit/18127813

du mener mest sansynlig det samem som "nei" velgerne :/ men samme da()

vlere votes!

flere*

I'm leaning towards no, don't really see the point in merging

well my arguemnt is that with "artist credits" ther is no reason to have a multitude of "don't know/care/rubarb" this artist

even though the credits will be kept, it still means future release adds will go to [anonymous] unless the editor explicitly sets an alias

it's not like we have hundreds of these SPAs, there's a fairly small, defined set of them

well peopel souldn't be addign this withotuh the artist s o the ditor voters soudl catch these

hoesntly? they popper of som paddehatter

there seems to be one each for every catagory of julemusik and hymns

Wizzcat: i'll leave it like it is then, and leave the amazon link too

hymns was merged into [religious music], so that's all good

good

tri_marianaaf: it'd be great if you add the sleeve scans from amz too, so people don't have to get confused later on

but why is "religious music" away fro m"christmas music" and why are they not noth in "unknown"?

because some people think the distinction is important?

[classical music], now that is a terrible artist

i accept that. but why now that we have artist credits, not use thme for that? also tags?

yes

Wizzcat: http://musicbrainz.org/release/b004ab5b-95c0-4d...

instead of usign so much effort keeping these "thematic" SPA's work on findign the artist(s)!

like I said, seperate entities are easier to use than aliases

the point is they shouldn't be used, they shoudl be fixed

I'd rather people didn't alias [15th century gregorian chant] to [unknown]

why not?

altought i'd rather have that on anon:)

as anon is a defined thing

nut trad could probably e merged into anon. with the artist credit

tri_marianaaf: \o/ I love caa :)

the CAA is the bomb of awesome

:)

CatCat: I actually strongly prefer keeping [traditional] separate, trad is very different from unknown

i agree

unknown =! anonymus

trad =! unknown

anyway, a lot of people have opinions on this, and it's in the guidelines, so on principle it should go through style, like with the previous SPA merges

huh

i guess i'm old

i lamented whne clutcher2 made [gregorian]

but that was merged back into ano n ithink

[disney] is seriously the worst thing ever

i honeslty thing we only need those 3

YES

aperhasp i picked the wrong one to start with :/

I don't think anyone disagrees with removing it, but it really should be cleaned out first

Wizzcat: i agree

hmm perhasp.. CotM?

but i need.. god i need help organising this, peopel always say what a GREAT and aWESOME idea it is, but when it comes down t oit. they don't edit a bit

CatCat: [trad] was merged into [anon] once already. Please never, ever, ever, *ever* do that again. D:

Freso: yes i agree, i don't know what came over me whne i said that. it's wrtong :O

CatCat: I'm not sure CotM really works, people want to do their own thing

:(

it worked when someone esle was the leader.

as soon as i started

it was "no do it this way ,no i want ot do it that way" :/

nah, it's just like those never-ending reports we have, once it's a chore it's not fun anymore

true

wich is why we need a set thing to do and thne do it i na set time

i wonder

select not jsut "clean up artist" but "do x to artist" and durign y time

and also! peopel should sign up for it

I think you'll have more luck asking people who have been editing [disney] recently if they want to help out

they'd sign up

community projects with members, like they have on Wikpedia, would probably work better

but that's what CotM is supposed ot be!

brainstorm, peopel sould sign up (becaome members)

http://musicbrainz.org/release/2dd39e8d-e82a-4d... how is this not just freaking v/a, jeez

becasue peopel are stupid Wizzcat

or they forgot to change it?

nobody's checking that people don't add new things to disney, that's the problem

CatCat: ahaha that's ok, better late :)

thanks

:)

lol Rowan Atkinson `really?

well i'm changeign this ot VA seriously

Wizzcat: yepp, also that gets hardenr when effort to find those is spread out ont several SPA's rather than the one (or tw o)

anyway, I'll see if I can help clean up disney

awesome!

it actually looks fairly doable

hoefully we can jsut get rid of these

we seem to have works for most of them, so it's just a matter of assigning properly

yea

Wizzcat: I like the cover art image...

HEY

it SAYS to use "artist credit" :O

But was the text (re)written after the AC system?

Freso: haha, yeah, that's a new low for amz I think

WAIT WTF

that's madness!

that's.. insane

!!!!!

FINE merge Bach into [classical music!!!!!]

DO IT

WHY THE FUCK NOT

I AM BEING SARCASTIC

unless that wasn't obvious

hi reosarevok

Heh, good idea

I didn't like that Bach guy anyway

8)

lol

What did I miss?

aw man

peopel are avocating merging shit that makes no sence

ut if i want o merge hel dritten into no artist or unknown suddenly it's a big no.no

it'sa bit like saying "we don't care that Rowling wrote these harry whatshislighningscarredface so we're merging those things into [genre goes here]"

Well, admittedly, if we care, shouldn't we just keep them as is instead of going around merging them, and actually try to find who did what?

(answer probably is "huh, we don't really care thaaat much" :P )

that's my point too

either we CARE so we fix it or we DON1't and i merge it inot whatever

i found the wikipage

Status: This is an official style guideline.

Sometimes it is useful to be a bit more specific when using [unknown]. You can use one of the following as the artist credit if applicable:

it says to use artist credit!

[language instruction]...

That it does

CatCat: Read the guideline again?

Freso: why? it does say that should be an artist credit for no artist

I do think that's one of the guidelines that were reviewed during the NGS transition, though

(so, not by style but by nikki and warp)

CatCat: "with regular use of [unknown], these should only be used as a last resort, pending further research. "

indeed.

but now they exsist

shouldn't have exsisted i nthe first palce

So if someone opposes it, they should ask you to stop the merge *and* go to style and ask for it to change

But not only one of the two

When was the AC system put in place?

At the same time this guideline was rewritten

May '11?

yep

Obviously the artist existed before