artysmokes | 2 Sep 16:07 2007
Picon

Re: RFC: IMDb AR change


Just shortening it to "has an IMDB page at" would be fine for now.
--
Arty

Mika Heiska-2 wrote:
> 
> The IMDb AR "is a soundtrack for the movie with an IMDb page at" is too 
> specific. Despite it's name, IMDb is not just movie database (tv series 
> and games for example), and the AR should be expanded to reflect that.
> 
> Would it be possible for the AR to have a list of different works, much 
> like the instrument list on the performer AR is done? This list would 
> include movie, video game and tv series (and any other thing IMDb lists 
> and we could use for releases) as options. In this case the wording of 
> the AR would not need changing, only the implementation of the AR.
> 
> 
> [release] is a soundtrack for the [work] with an IMDb page at [URL].
> and
> [URL] is the IMDb page for the [work] with the soundtrack [release].
> 
> 
> However, as the list for different works will no doubt remain quite 
> small, we could alternately just duplicate the current IMDb AR for tv 
> series and video games and add them as their own entries to the URL AR
> list.
> 
> Either way, I really think something needs to change.
> 
(Continue reading)

Mika Heiska | 2 Sep 19:14 2007
Picon

Re: RFC: IMDb AR change

Works for me as well.

~Mika

Kuno Woudt wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 07:07:05AM -0700, artysmokes wrote:
>> Just shortening it to "has an IMDB page at" would be fine for now.
> 
> agreed.
> 
> --kuno.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Musicbrainz-style mailing list
> Musicbrainz-style@...
> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
> 
Joel | 4 Sep 21:02 2007
Picon

Different titles on different versions of a track (e.g. acoustic)?

Firstly, I'll preface this whole thing with a disclaimer: I am a
greenhorn to MusicBrainz, and am not familiar with what discussion has
already taken place around the issues I'm discussing.  I've read up on
StyleGuidelines and all the wiki entries relevant to this discussion,
but that is the extent of my knowledge.
I am, in this discussion, primarily a Switchfoot fan, and make no
claim to have any knowledge of how MusicBrainz works other than what
has been written on the wiki.  As such, I am open to explanations of
how things work - I am somewhat familiar with the dynamics found in
communities such as this :)  I also make no claim to be without bias.
Although I am attempting to be even-handed in my description, I know
being unbiased is nigh impossible.

End disclaimer.

Firstly, I think the basic question is, what qualifies as "the same
song" per http://musicbrainz.org/doc/ConsistentOriginalData and
specifically  http://musicbrainz.org/doc/AmbiguousTrackNames ?  Is an
acoustic version the same song as the original, and should therefore
have the same title conventions?
 There has been a good bit of discussion about it on the edit thread
for the acoustic version of Oh! Gravity. on their most recent album.
( http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=7433382  ) and it makes
sense to me to bring it up in mb-style to clarify the various policies
surrounding it.

A quick (possibly biased) summary:  The title track on the LP
definitely has a period after Oh! Gravity. on the album cover, CD,
everything.  That is clearly the title of the title track.  However,
on the EP that was included in pre-orders (Oh! EP), the album cover
(Continue reading)

Jugdish | 5 Sep 00:24 2007
Picon

Fwd: RFC: Always show "No Vote" and make it the default

I'd like to bring an enhancement ticket from bugs.musicbrainz.org here
to you mailing list folks so that it can be seen by more eyes and get
some more feedback before moving it forward to the actual "coding"
stage.

The ticket in question is: http://bugs.musicbrainz.org/ticket/2569

In short, here are the proposed changes:

1. Make the "No Vote" option always show on voting pages, and don't
even give the user the option to remove it.

2. Make "No Vote" be the default-selected option when voting, but
allow users to change to "Abstain by default" in their prefs, should
they so choose.

Please read through the comments at
http://bugs.musicbrainz.org/ticket/2569 and voice your opinion on this
proposal, because I'd very much like to move forward with it. Thanks!
Brian Schweitzer | 5 Sep 06:32 2007
Picon

Re: RFC: IMDb AR change

> The IMDb AR "is a soundtrack for the movie with an IMDb page at" is too
> specific. Despite it's name, IMDb is not just movie database (tv series
> and games for example), and the AR should be expanded to reflect that.

I would agree that it's too specific, but in actually a different way - "has an IMDB page at" specifically still states it's an IMDB page.
Same problem exists for the "has a Wikipedia page at", actually.

For the IMDB AR, I brought up a few times in IRC the idea to expand it for other similar types of databases.  Specifically, IMDB doesn't cover musical theater.  However, depending on if it's broadway, non-broadway, or foreign/foreign cast, IBDB, the Lortel Archives, and castalbums.org do serve an essentially identical purpose.  The same is pretty much true for GMR (Game Music Revolution) for non-rip official soundtracks for games.

When I've brought it up, it always seems to get "sounds like a good idea, no objections" - but it uses the IMDB AR in the spirit of what the AR says, rather than the exact site that the AR specifies.

For the Wikipedia AR, it's been used more and more for wikia sites, and for the various band/artist/series specific wikipedia clones that have been popping up all over.  Again, it's linking to the right wiki(s), even when they're not actually "the official" Wikipedia.

Both ARs, to sum it up, have the same problem as "has a MySpace page at" vs a "has a online community page at" - by specifying a particular domain, the AR excludes all the sites that otherwise are in the same spirit as the AR.

I'm not sure what I would suggest using for the current IMDB, AR, but for the Wiki one, what about "has a wiki/wikia page at" rather than "has a Wikipedia page at"?

Brian
_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Lukáš Lalinský | 5 Sep 09:06 2007
Picon

Re: RFC: IMDb AR change

On St, 2007-09-05 at 00:32 -0400, Brian Schweitzer wrote:

> I'm not sure what I would suggest using for the current IMDB, AR, but
> for the Wiki one, what about "has a wiki/wikia page at" rather than
> "has a Wikipedia page at"?

Wikipedia is a well-known encyclopedia, "wiki" is just a technology to
build a website. I personally don't see the point to differentiate links
by technology they use. If some artist uses a wiki for their official
homepage, then it's official homepage. If they use a wiki to maintain
discography, then it's a discography page. Etc.

Lukas

_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Brian Schweitzer | 5 Sep 11:57 2007
Picon

OGLA is no more, suggesting the AR be deactivated, if not removed

As was expected, per http://www.olga.net/ :

OLGA is currently offline while we attempt to resolve legal issues with the archive.

We received a 'take down' letter (pages 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 ) from lawyers representing the NMPA and the MPA.

We greatly appreciate your support and hope to return to providing resources to the aspiring guitarist as soon as possible. Contact rcwoods for more information. In the meantime, we recommend the usenet newsgroups rec.music.makers.guitar.tablature and alt.guitar.tab.

This follows one a similar, temporary shutdown of OGLA for the same reasons back on July 10, 2007...

Relevant links: http://www.guitarnoise.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=26207 http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/tribpm/s_465216.html http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/13/1256224 http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5622879


This is something that's been rumored to be about to happen for a while now - very similar to the reason we haven't set up things like LyricsWiki ARs.  I'd suggest at minimum we ought to not accept new OGLA ARs for the time being (since there's no valid target for those ARs), and/or to be on the safe side, disable display of those ARs (if not simply getting rid of the AR altogether).

I've also set up a bugtrac entry for this: http://bugs.musicbrainz.org/ticket/3179

Brian
_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Aaron Cooper | 5 Sep 12:34 2007
Picon

Re: RFC: IMDb AR change

On 9/5/07, Lukáš Lalinský <lalinsky@...> wrote:
> On St, 2007-09-05 at 00:32 -0400, Brian Schweitzer wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure what I would suggest using for the current IMDB, AR, but
> > for the Wiki one, what about "has a wiki/wikia page at" rather than
> > "has a Wikipedia page at"?
>
> Wikipedia is a well-known encyclopedia, "wiki" is just a technology to
> build a website. I personally don't see the point to differentiate links
> by technology they use. If some artist uses a wiki for their official
> homepage, then it's official homepage. If they use a wiki to maintain
> discography, then it's a discography page. Etc.

Yeah, I really don't want to see 15 "wiki" links on an artists page
because it would dilute the purpose of having the ARs in the first
place.  If we linked to every random wiki that talks about an artist
we'd have a lot of duplicate info (that is probably gathered at the
main Wikipedia site) and a lot of incomplete sources that users would
have to waste their time sifting through.  My philosophy would be, "If
you find a wiki with more information, update Wikipedia."

By just linking to popular databases like PureVolume, Wiki, IMDB, etc.
we are connecting visitors to sites they are probably familiar with
and recognize as being useful informative.  MySpace links allow us to
hear quick samples of the artist, Wikipedia offers us quick summaries
and biographies, and so on.

-Aaron
Brian Schweitzer | 5 Sep 13:28 2007
Picon

Re: Musicbrainz-style Digest, Vol 29, Issue 2

place.  If we linked to every random wiki that talks about an artist
we'd have a lot of duplicate info (that is probably gathered at the
main Wikipedia site) and a lot of incomplete sources that users would
have to waste their time sifting through.  My philosophy would be, "If
you find a wiki with more information, update Wikipedia."

By just linking to popular databases like PureVolume, Wiki, IMDB, etc.
we are connecting visitors to sites they are probably familiar with
and recognize as being useful informative.  MySpace links allow us to
hear quick samples of the artist, Wikipedia offers us quick summaries
and biographies, and so on.

I think it's more the reverse - I was just reading an hour or so ago a wikipedia article's discussion where they were talking about being glad to have removed some release info, as the page had reached a size (with bio info and such) that they felt it no longer needed much more than a release overview's worth of data,  I'm not talking about just your basic mention on a wiki, but rather, well, a site like "this might be a wiki" at http://tmbw.net/ - much much more detailed info than the TMBG pages at Wikipedia, as it's artist specific.

Brian
_______________________________________________
Musicbrainz-style mailing list
Musicbrainz-style@...
http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-style
Philip Jägenstedt | 14 Sep 15:30 2007

RFC: sort name translation/transliteration for non-Latin script artists

Hi all!

After having edited many Chinese artists I became slightly frustrated
with the inconsequent use of the sort name and the lack of sensible
guidelines for artists in non-Latin scripts. The current style guide
[1] state that "all ArtistSortNames should be in Latin script. For
Japanese, Chinese, Greek, etc. ArtistNames this means they have to be
transliterated." A transliteration is a mapping from one script to
another and not a translation. Many Chinese artists however have taken
western names which are included on the album covera and these are
what are actually used as the sort name for mose artists. With the
proposed change to the sort name style I want to bring the guidline
into line with the current practice. First, however, I will explain
why the current practice is good and why following the current
guidelines is not useful.

There are two types of users: those who read Chinese and those who
don't. Those who read Chinese don't need a transcription of the sort
name, or should at least be satisfied with having the transcription as
an alias. Those who don't read Chinese will search for Chinese artists
using the name under which they are known internationally, which is
almost never a simple transcription. Using the "international" name as
the sort name help these users as it is shown in search results, in
artist pages, etc. Just having the international name as an alias
doesn't help if it doesn't show up in the search results. I am also
told that the sort name is used for translating the artist name in the
tagger, so it is important that the name by which the artist is
actually known is used as the sort name.

The one thing I haven't mentioned is sorting. It's a sort name,
shouldn't it be used for sorting? In theory yes, but no romanization
of Chinese artist names will be useful for sorting. The reason is that
different romanization systems are used in mainland China, on Taiwan
and in Hong Kong[2]. The same family name can be written Zhou, Chou or
Chow, making sorting by transliteration very un-useful. The truth of
the matter probably is that the current system isn't quite able to
handle international artists as well as one would hope, and this will
not change in the immediate future. I do not know what a correct
sorting for Chinese artists would be (sorting by unicode wouldn't be
good either), and am not trying to solve this problem presently.

All the above most certainly apply to other artists than Chinese ones,
for example Japanese artists often seem to have English names. My
suggested change is fairly simple:

1. All ArtistSortNames should be in Latin script. Other scripts such
as Greek, Hebrew and Han (Chinese/Japanese) should use a sort name as
per below.
 * An official transliteration/translation, e.g. as it appears on album covers.
 * A widely known transliteration/translation, e.g. as known in the
press or by fans.
 * A transliteration using the standard transliteration system used in
the region where the artist is active.

The list isn't intended to be strictly ordered, because it could very
well happen that the artist once printed an English name on an album
but is widely known under some other name. In such cases the style
guide shouldn't mandate the use of the English name. The intention is
simply to use the name under which the artists is known to
international audiences.

I leave you with some examples:

周杰倫 "Chou, Jay" uses his English name for sort name
(http://musicbrainz.org/artist/a223958d-5c56-4b2c-a30a-87e357bc121b.html)

張信哲 "Chang, Shin Che" uses a transliteration, because I changed it
from the more reasonable "Chang, Jeff" before coming to the conclusion
about sort names I now have
(http://musicbrainz.org/artist/9b02dc5c-6d06-4883-9e89-8086d4b42364.html)

梁靜茹 "Leung, Jasmine" uses an old English name instead of "Leong, Fish"
as she is now widely known as
(http://musicbrainz.org/artist/9e52fbe2-dcc2-4720-9ddd-9ad8202a5287.html)

[1] http://wiki.musicbrainz.org/SortNameStyle
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanization_of_Chinese

Gmane