[mb-users] HowToWriteEditNotes

[Kerensky97]

bogdanb wrote:
> 
> It might be useful to add a little list of what kind of proof is good
> and bad for some edit types where you noticed users make mistakes all
> the time.
> 
It's not specific to edit types but here's my general list on good and bad
sources.

Best, direct from the producer/artist info:
Legally purchased CD's
Official band sites
Official label sites

Good, community edited sites:
Wikipedia
Discogs
Fan communities

So-So, corporate sites and independant fans:
Amazon
HMV
Barnes & Noble
CD Universe
Fan Sites/Blogs

Bad, illegal sites and file trading communities:
Torrent sites
Download sites
Sites that gather data using bots scouring the web (untrustworthy)
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/HowToWriteEditNotes-tf2589572s2885.html#a7230223
Sent from the Musicbrainz - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.