[mb-users] Why do we have a "X Has Picture at Y" relationship?

[Oliver Charles]

Well, in my opinion, voters don't work to guidelines. Voters
understand that if an artist is unknown that any picture is a good
picture really - while if an artist is well known, we need to be more
vigorous about the voting and make sure high quality photography is
what we are allowing. This is half of the problem with guidelines on
something so subjective.

I agree with a minimum size however, but I don't think the fact that
we have no guidelines is a reason to remove this (potenial useful) ar
immediatley.

On 9/20/07, Aaron Cooper <cooperaa at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/20/07, Oliver Charles <oliver.g.charles at googlemail.com> wrote:
> > True, but on the artist page redesign, whatever we decide we are most
> > likely going to have an artist picture at some point – surely we need
> > some way to decide what this artwork is? Last.fm has a picture
> > section, and they don't have billions of pictures, because crap ones
> > get rejected by voting.
>
> We have no guidelines for this AR currently.  If we are allowing
> subjective voting based on the question "Would this be a good picture
> to represent the artist?" then I don't think these edits should be
> included with regular edits.  No one wants an assortment of failed
> edits because others thought the pictures weren't "good" enough, do
> we?
>
> Are we going to allow all voters to define what they think is "good"
> or offer some guidelines such as minimum size, quality, etc.?
>
> -Aaron
>
> _______________________________________________
> MusicBrainz-users mailing list
> MusicBrainz-users at lists.musicbrainz.org
> http://lists.musicbrainz.org/mailman/listinfo/musicbrainz-users
>