#musicbrainz

This URL is not allowed for the selected link type, or is incorrectly formatted.

does https://kdhx.org/articles/inside-kdhx/543-kdhx-... belong in the Release information External Links?

iconoclasthero: the allmusic link loads for me, so maybe a region block?

iconoclasthero: are you trying to add it for a release?

That's a release-group level link

the "This URL ..." response is from musicbrainz

oh, this is an error on the mb site

For a release you need the specific version from https://www.allmusic.com/album/brown-eyed-hands...

and yes, i am trying to add it to MB

(in this case there's only one, but)

Allmusic album pages store multiple versions of an album, so they map to release groups, not releases :)

so i have to click on releases to get the url that will work?

Yes, and pick the specific one that matches what you're adding (so CD, or vinyl, or reissue, or whatnot)

Or just go to the release group later and add the album there (or both!)

We really should make it so you can add / edit release group links from the release editor, but for now that's the two options

For the kdhx link, I'd say it's good for an edit note but I'm not sure if it fits as an external link - maybe as "discography entry" or something

ok, KDHX first: they're who "made" the record.

I had selected "purchase for mail-order"

That'd be https://shop.kdhx.org/products/brown-eyed-hands... but it seems it's gone

it is

https://shop.kdhx.org/products/st-louis-salutes... I guess?

that works for me.

now back to allmusic: I keep trying to paste in "https://shop.kdhx.org/products/st-louis-salutes-brown-eyed-handsome-man-the-father-of-rock-n-roll-cd?_pos=1&_sid=f8d3de453&_ss=r"

errr...

and it keeps shortening it and rejecting it

you lost me on the release/group distinction.

should I be adading this as a release group?

iconoclasthero: you need to pick the specific release

when you add the release, it'll automatically create a release group for it if you didn't select an existing one

So, click on the ticket, https://www.allmusic.com/album/release/brown-ey...

... LINK not ticket, sorry, brainfart

yeah, i thought i had done that already, nevermind, i got it to work

album/release links (mr00 whatever codes) go on the release :)

finally, i read over some of the formatting notes...

brown-eyed handsome man is correct.

however, it appears that berry released the song as brown eyed handsome man.

What does one go with?

Whatever is printed, for the titles

But the song itself (the work) will probably be without the hyphen then

well the album title is "Brown Eyed ..."

(not sure if you've already dealt with works, but that's the composition level, so the thing that puts together the original and all covers etc)

i have not

the level of interest I have is to tag stuff in picard and move on...

Oh, I see the back cover also prints brown eyed

I'd use that then

kk

now, the last thing with this: the cover's subtitle is "Saint Louis [i.e. not St. Louis] Salutes The Father of Rock'n'Roll"

oh wait...

the allmusic title is all wrong if you look at the KDHX order page

I mean, the allmusic version makes more sense grammatically, but I guess the label might have intended it the other way

according to the latter, it is "St. Louis [though the album cover clearly says 'Saint'] Salutes: Brown Eyed Handsome Man, The Father of Rock'n'Roll"

well all music doesn't even use the same words... it uses "ChucK Berry" and KDXH uses "Father of Rock'n'Roll" so that is obviously wrong.

even according to the cover art on allmusic

so. what do I name this?

[19:06] <reosarevok> We really should make it so you can add / edit release group links from the release editor, but for now that's the two options

yesplx

and not unsurprisingly, half a dozen of these local indie artists aren't in the MBDB: https://i.imgur.com/AfAhrtp.png

I have zero information on them from this album I picked up from the library.

eh. jsut add with "on $release title" for now

also highfiv for getting random tuff fro mthe library to add to mb! \o

thanks...though i got it to add to my collection...because of that, I'm tagging it with picard, because it isn't in MBDB, I'm adding it

yes of course

.. thats how it starts ;)

i know how terrible a problem database consistency is so i'm trying to learn the rules.

someone keeps rejecting my edits so i figured I'd ask some questions here

wait they are and not saying why?

they should be writing why and posting links to styleguides etc

i'm not understanding the reasons and the process...

i'll go back and look in a minute.

should i use the actual title or should I use $release title?

eh. sorry "$release title" was jsut a palceholder for (the release title)

I don't remember it and i probably cant type it right

iconoclasthero: the release title comment was (I think) to say that if you have a random artist you know nothing about, you can just add it, and if it clashes with something else, you can just add a disambiguation like "on Brown Eyed Handsome Man"

aloslazy and needing ot go make dinner :D

(if you can't be sure it's the same artist that's already there)

yeah, i didn't know if MB used that as a back-end variable

oic!

yea sorry not-a-coder but i pick up vernacualr that is used

sorry to confuse you

!

so what's the final ruling on the title?

Whatever is printed, you choose the order that seems the best tbh

ok

b4cd48ee-7bfb-4b91-8cb1-73d1e13e2c3a

now as far as entries that are getting rejected or otherwise commented on unfavorably, i believe that chaban has been doing most/all of them.

one comment is "why repeat the link in the annotation if you already added it as a relationship?"

i guess i would answer, why not?

but more to the point, why not just fix it if the redundancy is unnecessary?

and/or undesireable.

or "> use “Island” or “Def Jam Recordings” labels rather than this record company"

well which one do i pick if the album actually says Island Def Jam Music?

Well, if you do something and a person should fix it every time, then this person needs to spend their volunteering time fixing it instead of doing something else :) (re: redundancy)

I still fix classical music additions from people who have been doing the same thing for over a year, despite me reminding them that there's a better way, and it can get frustrating :D

re: labels, I dunno, labels are hard

i've really not gotten a hang of the responses i've gotten to entries.

i just get these emails with comments that really don't help me to improve the accuracy or proper style of my additions.

see e.g. https://beta.musicbrainz.org/edit/63961996

BTW, re https://beta.musicbrainz.org/edit/64481093 - keep in mind the annotation field is creative-commons licensed

So unless this text is copyright-free or licensed appropriately, we really shouldn't paste the whole thing there :)

So, with https://beta.musicbrainz.org/edit/63961996 the point is that the release is already marked as live and has a DVD and a CD

So the annotation doesn't really add any new data

except that there are additional tracks i couldn't figure out how to add...

and I'll take out the pasted portion.

But you didn't specify that in the annotation, just the edit note :) *that* bit you could probably put on the annotation, for future editors

Everyone can see it's a live CD/DVD, but they can't see (unless they check edit history) that you left some tracks off and why, so having that in the annotation as sort of a "fix me if you can" makes sense to me

https://musicbrainz.org/edit/63951402 is for a CD, but you linked to the digital streaming ASIN. The CD version has a different ASIN

ok, that clears things up there. it's unfortunate that the order is the way it is in this particular case.

Same goes for the other streaming comment :)

yes, that i got, but! i had no idea what was meant by chaban's comment... just an e.g. of wtf are you talking about!?

i take it you removed the annotation for B-E HM?

Sure. chaban: try to be more clear next time, and suggest using the CD link instead ;)

does catquest=catcat?

Yes

ok

and one last thing and then i'm off...

in my world, "Show notes" means the comments about a live performance, a.k.a. a "show"

iconoclasthero: I didn't remove anything, but I think you added the annotation as an open edit :)

Which means it's still pending, and you can just cancel that edit adding it and it won't apply

Show notes is confusing because it is meant for podcasts

for instance, notes about a particular concert or about the bootleg quality, etc.

maybe change it to "Podcast show notes"

It's specifically the notes about a specific episode of a podcast show made by the show

Yeah, maybe we should

The podcast people requesting it probably don't deal with bootlegs, and I don't either so I didn't know of any possible confusion when adding it

But you're not by far the first who gets confused, and in fact people tend to use it for "I want to link to this but I'm not sure what fits"

So making it more specific sounds sensible and is an easy change :)

[Show] Notes Notes

MR > D Latvala Reels @ 3 3/4 ips > DBX Reels @ 7 1/2 ips > PCM > DAT > CD; upgrade relative to previous shn copies; includes soundcheck and most of encores; via Mike Hall; tracked for 2x74 + 1x80 (with alternate tracking suggestion)

or in the case of the other one I mentioned, it is actually a description of the recording of the show from Rolling Stone...

and that archive.org example isn't exactly the best, but in my mind i'm thinking those are "show notes," not e.g., https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-hist...

those type of show notes

what is an example of a podcast that belongs in musicbrainz anyway?

anything, I'd think

(with audio books and language courses and lectures, MB grew beyond 'music' quite a while ago)

Personally? I'd consider evergreen shows like e.g. https://www.20k.org/ to be more worthwhile than a daily news show, but follow your bliss :-)

Oh, iconoclasthero, did you get an answer last night (at least *my* last night) about tagging releases without entering them in MB?