I wouldn't add any disambiguation except when there's a very similarly named instrument, but I dunno if there is, in these cases
CatQuest
I mean, I think disambiguation comments are what should be shown in, yea that case
I found that they were all very confusable for eachother imho
but honestly isn't this a search server display issue? I mean I get why description shows (it's the only place it shows i think )
but right now description is doing what disambiguation shoudl be doing
Freso
CatQuest: I don't necessarily want you to do anything about it. I just wanted to alert you to the topic's presence. If you want to ignore it and pretend it never existed, that's fine by me.
D4RK-PH0ENiX joined the channel
reosarevok
There is a ticket to just drop the description because it mostly duplicates Wikipedia text without a credit
CatQuest
i tryi to make the disambiguiations as short but descriptive as possible
reosarevok
(by chirlu IIRC)
Which might also be a reasonable solution :p
CatQuest
yes
it's an old hang of, fro mbefore instruments were enteties, you nkow
now we have the abiltiy to actually link instruments to wiki(data)
ftr: I explicitly reword descriptions and disambiguations so as to not be c&p wikipedia withotuh credit
but yea, just having the wikipedia blurb show up on the page as it does now probably does what it needs to without description?
the only reason to have a lenghty description I see is if there is no (english) wikipedia or no wikipedia at all or limited information that I had to dig for which would be useful. (but then there's annotations, honestly)
can instruments have annotations?
if so: more "description" content to those i say
move not more
reosarevok
I think they can, yeah
If not they should, but
CatQuest
yes
as before, the "description" was literally because instruments where not entities
well if one of you wanna basically say that this to that guy. but honestly I'm kinda preoccupied right now and freso said I could ignore(!) it so...
CatQuest feels a bit bad abotu that thoguh :/
Freso
CatQuest: You can also not ignore it but just not reply to it right now. :)
reosarevok: what's the link to that comm topic about guitar vs guitars
reosarevok
Isn't that just a ticket?
I seem to remember it's an INST ticket, not a topic
CatQuest
oh
no wonder i cant find it
uh, you have alink for it anyway? :B
nvm i found it
btw since I have you here, reosarevok https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pianet mentions explicitly that the Pianet "consisted of two distinctly different mechanism groups with characteristically different sound."
which to me sounds like (ugh) different instruments (sorta)
sooo.. what do? make a genric one and have the two others nestled under?
reosarevok
I'd add just one instrument for now
CatQuest
hmmm
reosarevok
Because I doubt we're actually going to get enough info on liners etc to know which one it is anyway
CatQuest
I don't mind adding more thoguh
reosarevok
Yeah, but if we have 3 for a quite uncommon instrument, I think it'd kinda confuse people
CatQuest
I'll add aliases with the data ranges and stuff then :D
(pity aliases can't have disambiguiation comments :P)
or wait they can?
inB4 aliases as "enteties"
(I wouldn't mind that)
would sole so many issues with artists and names and instruments and things like historical places.. hmm
solve*
maybe in 2026
by then..hahaha
matoro has quit
freso: possibly irritating fact about me: i can't not act when I am faced with an "issue" or "problem /complaint" that is related to my "work" or what I "do"
especially if it's some I've very recently done (explicitly if done as a (percived) improvement to something that was already considered a undone/problematic thing needing fixing (eg lots of open inst requests.))
reosarevok: "solo" Not sure what you mean about solo piano piece -- you mean if it's the only instrument on there there's not much need for it to specify soloist vs. plain instrumentalist? probably correct.
reosarevok
I mean that people keep setting the attribute for solo piano/violin/whatever pieces, because well, they are solo, right? But that's not what was intended at all IIRC
(it's supposed to indicate a solo part, not the only part)
CatQuest
reosarevok: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cembalet has no ticket, but I feel it's relevant to the pianet (which has one) as well as that the other instruments invented by Ernst Zacharias has been or does have tickets(and I'madding thme now)
reosarevok
Just add a ticket and add it if you feel it's relevant enough I assume :)
CatQuest
ohi should add a ticket myself? is that must?
loi also he made a "guitaret"
¬_¬ that guy
reosarevok
Well, it's not a must, but you were talking yourself about making a ticket for something at some point (was it tape?) so it would be documented
So I guess it'd make sense in that way :)
Dunno
CatQuest
oh that was for things like I am not usre and not doing it right away and for help with discussion
reosarevok
It's not a huge deal either way
CatQuest
this woudl jsut be doen with the others. ok
(basically i'd end up adding it thne creating a ticket jsut to close it with "added it" seems kidna.. pointless :P)
reosarevok
Yeah it'd only be useful if you're using closed tickets to autogenerate a list of new stuff for Freso to post or something
Or well not only but mostly :)
CatQuest
nah, he wants me to post him a sepsic lsit in mail so nah (tho he coudl ahve doe nthat too ¬¬)
ugh why is words wrong so much rightnow
hawke1
reosarevok: I don't see much harm in saying that a single-instrument performance have a soloist, but you're correct that's not really how it was intended.
Freso
CatQuest: I'd be happy to be able to use auto-generated lists on Jira too.
matoro joined the channel
reosarevok
Meh
Wikisource autoselects to lyrics so can't be used for biographies :/
so, if a person USUALLY performs as one name, would you want to link the persons real name, or the name he usually performs at if he does a few tracks as a different name or as a group?
that sentence mightve been more complicated than it needed to, i hope you understand what i mean.. :D
Rotab: Use the name the person most often/officially use. E.g., I'd be "Freso" even if that's not my legal name. If they use several different names for different projects/genres/type-of-things, then create an artist for each and a "real name" artist to link them together.
Rotab
alright, real name it is
reosarevok
hibiscuskazeneko: looks fine
hibiscuskazeneko
Thought so (I wasn't sure about track 5 since I didn't see anything about parenthesized text in the Spanish style guide)
Rotab
Freso: so if you released a track as "Bator" in the samestyle as "Freso", it would be credited to "Freso", with no artist page for "Bator"?
reosarevok
It would probably be credited to Freso credited as Bator
Rotab
credited to Freso credited as Bator?
krono_ joined the channel
krono has quit
hawke1
Yes -- the artist 'freso' with a credit as 'Bator'
ugh, can we not mix religion and musicbrainz? (regarding bible-as-artist thread)
regagain joined the channel
zotherst1 joined the channel
zotherstupidguy has quit
krono has quit
krono joined the channel
CallerNo6
hawke1, anecdote #1: when I was at the UofU in the 80s, computers in the library were still a newish thing. Being a jerk, I did an author search for "God" and it returned "no titles found". If that's what you get at a university founded by a Mormon prophet, that should be good enough right?