#musicbrainz

looking at their discogs page

in this case, I'd suggest removing the discogs link so you can split the artist.

kepstin-work: Bah, now I have to wait for the edits to get applied.

if you ask really nice, you could get some people here to vote on it so it passes quicker :)

I was about to say.

Anyone want to vote on my last 4 edits so I can get this change done? http://musicbrainz.org/user/b.m.andrews/edits/open

you don't need to remove the 'collaborated on' ars

the split will handle those automatically

kepstin-work: Ah, I just did it in case.

I'll cancel those then.

Anyone else? Just need 1 more vote apiece.

changing release quality to normal on http://musicbrainz.org/edit/17950031 , berhaps I can get some votes? definetly does not have any release level credits, some of which could be added now some later… and the remaining data is somewhat incorrect as well

SultS: I'll vote swap you. :P

DWSR: I already voted on yours :P

I know, I voted on yours as well.

I'm just shamelessly plugging at the moment.

thanks :) I guess I should check how many do I need for it to pass (at some point)

"5 unanimous votes"

to pass right away

I assume

but in 14 days maybe less

no

+4 seems to be the number

It needs 5 unanimous votes.

Otherwise it rejects.

Suggestions for how to handle http://itunes.apple.com/us/album/this-is-dubste... #36 and #37?

I'm using the compilation special purpose VA at the moment.

GetDarker is an artist?

Label.

credit Darkside: http://www.discogs.com/release/3507750

Cool, that's what I was looking for.

Thanks.

Edits get applied at ~xx:05, right?

DWSR: modbot runs every hour on the hour, and takes a while to run.

Yeah, figured.

Is there any way to save a partial release?

In like a user sandbox or something?

nope.

huh

Where did people get the idea it needs 5 (or 4) unanimous?

reosarevok: it says so on the official guidelines talking about data quality.

For passing unanimously, yeah

But for passing on expiration, it just needs to have votes

It'll pass on one yes vote on expiration?

No.

It'll pass on 5 yes.

But it doesn't need to be unianimous.

It can be 5 yes and 4 no.

(I think is what you're trying to say)

reosarevok: http://musicbrainz.org/doc/Data_Quality does not make it clear to me at least

reosarevok: perhaps the guideline pages should be updated to actually have this information on it.

once we figure out *what* information is correct :)

“LowerDataQualityEdit Is hard to pass. It takes more unanimous votes than other edits in the old DQ (~ 1.5 to 2 times more).”

I can’t see info about pass on expiration

How can that page suck so terribly?

reosarevok: Do you really have to ask?

"User lowers DQ legitimately. We suppose they enter legitimate edits right afterwards (or even just before)."

dunno, but it mentions reject on expiration twice without any additional info

Who the hell supposed that?

If I had all that information, I wouldn't need to lower the quality :p

oh, and thanks for all the voters :) I have 5 :)

I'm all for downvoting quality.

1) Because the system sucks and 2) because it's misleading anyway.

Can we just delete the current data quality system?

hawke_1: that was my hope :)

Seems to be a pretty common sentiment around here.

maybe we can get the deletion of the current data quality system into the next schema change :)

I would have no objections :)

I think this is an instance where no system at all is better than the current system.

A one-way data quality system might be interesting

but I doubt anyone has much interest in a new locking-style DQ system in general

You could make the edits very long expiries.

but I’m off for now

expiration*

does it need an RFC?

And make the required votes be like 10 unanimous or something

It would obviously need a server ticket; would that be added after the rfc or immediately?

I think asking someone would be a good idea

whether that be an official RFC or not

(by someone, I mean some list/something representative of users in general

http://musicbrainz.org/account/donation <--- whoops.

maybe there’s someone out there who’s found it beneficial

kepstin-work: ah good to know it doesn’t protect recs. tracklist is the most important anyway

well, it has one almost-legitimate use right now: locking releases to make capitalization changes not autoedits.

kepstin-work: ah good to know it doesn’t protect recs. tracklist is the most important anyway

kepstin-work: I was refused this use of HQ

I said "almost-legitimate"

kepstin-work: does that actually *work*?

I never thought about it

kepstin-work: hey ? no votes in http://tickets.musicbrainz.org/browse/MBS-4874 ?

is it duplicate of something ?

i dunno

I'm not sure if that's really the best solution.

then vote B

Anyone have the Discogs to MB importer working?

Mine doesn't appear to be.

I don’t use any shit importer ;p

don’t misunderstand me, "shit" is discogs, not the importer itself

DWSR: there are 2 discogs importer, aren’t they ?

try the other one

No idea.

I'm looking at USerscripts.org.

Only the one.

DWSR: browser?

Chrome.

then it won't work without changes

ah yes this author writes for firefox only

iirc

I thought there were two discogs importers, but it seems not

reosarevok: You can just pastebin me the .js

the cool discogs importer would be an OCR (optical character recognition) on discogs pictures :)

ffs, I had pastebin-ed it

that would make it an almighty importer actually

Wonder where

reosarevok: If you have it still active on your browser, you can just grab the .js :P

jesus2099: doesn't OCR usually give crap results anyway?

better than discogs

DWSR: that's the plan b, but it means going into the Chrome folders

reosarevok: it’s easier to fix language typoes than wrong data

And checking folders with silly names

Because they refuse to just let you get the code easily

kepstin-work: where is gits ?

jesus2099: "gists" - it's a service provided by github.com : https://gist.github.com/kepstin

huh, the public view only shows the most recent 5 pastes.

seems cool

they have support for anonymous posting as well

and since it's stored in git, it has awesome revision control support: https://gist.github.com/2364412 :)

DWSR, https://gist.github.com/2910651

How do I do no cat #?

That should work

[none]?

Yes

DWSR: you might also need http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/110844

lol, you can fork someone's gist if you want to update it.

kepstin-work: can you delete your stuff ?

jesus2099: yes, if it's associated with your account.

(I don't think you can delete anonymous ones)