OH COME ON YINDESU DON’T TELL ME YOU’RE REMOVING ALL THE SUB LABELS ! \(°o°;)/
2012-11-19 32441, 2012
yindesu
?
2012-11-19 32444, 2012
Freso
We should have "ACs" for labels.
2012-11-19 32420, 2012
yindesu
jesus2099 not sure what your concern is but the only things I'm removing are bad aliases
2012-11-19 32449, 2012
nikki
jesus2099: more the opposite, he's splitting things up even more
2012-11-19 32406, 2012
jesus2099
yindesu: I am/was afraid that you did « specialised sub label » → « parent label / distributor »
2012-11-19 32423, 2012
yindesu
I split up Sony Music Records Inc. from Sony Records, because they should be split up
2012-11-19 32428, 2012
nikki
I just hope you're never going to leave mb, yindesu, because someone has to watch all those labels and make sure everything gets moved to the right place
2012-11-19 32431, 2012
yindesu
it's caused a ton of bad edits.
2012-11-19 32438, 2012
jesus2099
I'm ok with having only one big label when it's the same name
2012-11-19 32439, 2012
yindesu
What I'm doing _should_ make it easier
2012-11-19 32449, 2012
yindesu
because if someone searches for "SMR", they no longer choose "Sony Records"
2012-11-19 32457, 2012
yindesu
at worst they'll put it in Sony Music Records Inc.
2012-11-19 32409, 2012
nikki
we can't even get toshiba-emi and emi music japan right and those are really simple, so I can't imagine that splitting things up is going to make it any simpler
2012-11-19 32431, 2012
jesus2099
like we did for Victor, I don't care if the company was in a trust from 1989-1991 and then bought by WTF in 1992 and then independant again in 1993-2010
2012-11-19 32431, 2012
nikki
even discogs has a load of releases under the wrong labels and their number one rule is that you have to own the release you're adding :/
2012-11-19 32433, 2012
jesus2099
;P
2012-11-19 32454, 2012
nikki
so I can't see how splitting things up even more is going to work
2012-11-19 32421, 2012
yindesu
my logic is that most of the incorrectly-chosen labels were chosen because too many different things were in one Label
2012-11-19 32426, 2012
jesus2099
nikki: I'm pretty sure no one has the records added on discogs, if you see the amount of mistakes
2012-11-19 32426, 2012
yindesu
e.g. Sony Music Records Inc. != Sony Records
2012-11-19 32446, 2012
yindesu
Sony Music Records Inc. can stand for Sony Records, gr8! Records, Studioseven Recordings, V (VVV Records), Fifty Four Sounds, or god knows what else
2012-11-19 32454, 2012
jesus2099
i'd like a free text label field :D
2012-11-19 32402, 2012
jesus2099
no more label entity
2012-11-19 32422, 2012
jesus2099
oh maybe not, too exxxtremez
2012-11-19 32436, 2012
nikki
jesus2099: my point is just that on discogs you're *supposed* to own it so you should (in theory) be able to look at the cover when adding something, musicbrainz doesn't even have that.
2012-11-19 32443, 2012
yindesu
by removing all the bad aliases and splitting things up, it becomes harder to accidentally choose the wrong label. That's my belief
2012-11-19 32405, 2012
yindesu
the bad aliases is the biggest point
2012-11-19 32408, 2012
jesus2099
probably yindesu but if you change a label, please re-add what's missing (like this EPIC thing)
2012-11-19 32432, 2012
nikki
yindesu: but only if people understand what to add from the cover if they're adding it from the cover, and only if the website information is accurate if they're adding it from a website
2012-11-19 32450, 2012
yindesu
doesn't matter, fmera has a no vote on it so need a response from him before doing any more edits (unless you plan to add currenly-dupes)
2012-11-19 32418, 2012
jesus2099
nikki: the wabsites (except CDJournal) always list the parent/distributor :/
2012-11-19 32420, 2012
nikki
e.g. lots of people think the label is the copyright holder and most websites make no distinction when labels change names (because it's still the same label, so they don't need to)
2012-11-19 32423, 2012
jesus2099
or the latest name
2012-11-19 32431, 2012
yindesu
I've made a point of saying that in all of my no votes.
2012-11-19 32442, 2012
yindesu
to stop using Amazon because they use distributors and manufacturers, not imprints
2012-11-19 32458, 2012
jesus2099
I think yindesu bases edits on what's on releases (I've seen pics links), that's right
2012-11-19 32442, 2012
jesus2099
yindesu: not only amazon… up to now, I only know CDJournal which shows more correct labals (only few mistakes I've seen, bery rare)
2012-11-19 32427, 2012
yindesu
I'm pretty sure they put "SR Sony Records" for anything Sony Music Japan Inc., in any case sonymusicshop.jp should be the smarter choice over CD Journal for SMEJ... (except international post-2001)
2012-11-19 32450, 2012
nikki
it's not post 2001
2012-11-19 32402, 2012
nikki
SRI was still in use after that
2012-11-19 32411, 2012
nikki
2001 is only when they created the *company*
2012-11-19 32418, 2012
yindesu
what I meant was that the information is less clear after 2001
that's why I want that disambiguation fast-tracked
2012-11-19 32410, 2012
jesus2099
yindesu: I said CDJournal is correct, not CD-Japan (of course CD-Japan is not) ;)
2012-11-19 32428, 2012
yindesu
yeah, I'm referring to why I entered that disambiguation edit.
2012-11-19 32431, 2012
jesus2099
ALL websites are wrong in 95% of cases where label is owned
2012-11-19 32436, 2012
yindesu
"SME Records" is among my open edits by far
2012-11-19 32439, 2012
jesus2099
exceot CDJournal ;)
2012-11-19 32437, 2012
Bakura joined the channel
2012-11-19 32427, 2012
nikki
ugh
2012-11-19 32433, 2012
nikki
I was going to vote no, but whatever
2012-11-19 32419, 2012
nikki
I think it's a really really bad idea trying to force entire label company histories into musicbrainz, because it's really not designed for it
2012-11-19 32427, 2012
jesus2099
I’ll check my release out tonight and vote, it seems correct after we also add the correct EPIC
2012-11-19 32432, 2012
nikki
but if you're willing to clean up every single label and watch them all indefinitely, have fun
2012-11-19 32445, 2012
yindesu
I'm hoping people will read "do NOT file releases here".
2012-11-19 32451, 2012
jesus2099
nikki: if we could just remove the date fields and everything from labels :)
2012-11-19 32452, 2012
nikki
haha, yeah
2012-11-19 32453, 2012
yindesu
that shows up in the release editor
2012-11-19 32457, 2012
yindesu
annotations don't
2012-11-19 32437, 2012
jesus2099
nikki: why removing catalogue number link to label would be worse than now ?
2012-11-19 32452, 2012
jesus2099
I see it’s better
2012-11-19 32457, 2012
jesus2099
and simpler
2012-11-19 32403, 2012
jesus2099
to avoid mistakes
2012-11-19 32413, 2012
nikki
jesus2099: because I don't think that linking catnos to labels is where the problem is
2012-11-19 32434, 2012
nikki
the problem is identifying labels in the first place
2012-11-19 32448, 2012
yindesu
maybe we should rename Label in the release editor to Imprint
2012-11-19 32449, 2012
v6lur joined the channel
2012-11-19 32402, 2012
jesus2099
It’s alway s link to parent label then we have to relink to sub label… if it was not linked, we could just add the missing label and no more fixing would be required + only few people know how to analyse a catalogue number to say which it is
2012-11-19 32408, 2012
nikki
I think even fewer people would have a clue what it means then
2012-11-19 32424, 2012
yindesu
No one has a clue what a Disambiguation or Annotation is either
2012-11-19 32436, 2012
jesus2099
a catalogue number is the nice looking reference that is printed on the spine
2012-11-19 32447, 2012
yindesu
I've swapped a half dozen of those in the past week too
2012-11-19 32422, 2012
jesus2099 avatar is TINA from FF6 ! http://www.tropheesps3.com/avatar/patate12.png
2012-11-19 32431, 2012
nikki
if you have any better suggestions for names for them, feel free
2012-11-19 32419, 2012
jesus2099
HEY CatCat IS IT CAPSLOCK DAY TODAY ? I WANT TO KNOW !
2012-11-19 32420, 2012
yindesu
apart from explicitly putting in the release editor, "do not use Manufacturer or Distributor", I don't have any ideas other than Imprint or Label Logo
2012-11-19 32443, 2012
jesus2099
nikki: even if you think the big problem is not the catalogue/label link, what does it benefit to have that link in the first place ? (i’m not trying to upset you or to tell anyone’s wrong, i’m just making up my mind through discuss)
2012-11-19 32410, 2012
nikki
it might help if we could actually add manufacturers and distributors and stuff. but I really wouldn't want to do that unless we had a way to make it so only manufacturers can be entered as manufacturers and only companies as companies, etc, but that would need label types to support multiple types (schema change...) and for the interface to filter out the ones it's not going to let you select
2012-11-19 32450, 2012
nikki
then I probably wouldn't care, since we could mark companies as companies and nobody would be able to select them
2012-11-19 32401, 2012
nikki
(doesn't solve the problem of imprints being renamed though)
2012-11-19 32414, 2012
jesus2099
nikki: you mean we shouldn’t even set distributors now ? only sub-label … but it’s linked to a parent label’s catalogue number… this link is only annoying, it seems
2012-11-19 32437, 2012
yindesu
there's Label-Label and Release-Label relationships for distributor
2012-11-19 32441, 2012
yindesu
already
2012-11-19 32459, 2012
nikki
is distributing the same as publishing?
2012-11-19 32413, 2012
nikki
I've never seen a release talk about a publisher so I've never used it
2012-11-19 32419, 2012
yindesu
distributing is not the same as manufacturing
2012-11-19 32428, 2012
yindesu
I assume Publish is synonymous with Manufacture here.
2012-11-19 32434, 2012
nikki
(and it still has the problem of forcing people to add companies which then get misused)
2012-11-19 32448, 2012
nikki
see, we have a relationship but nobody know what it's for :P
2012-11-19 32451, 2012
jesus2099
publishing is on recordings (we can see the info in minc for JP for instance or sacem for FR)
