[mb-users] review in discogs

[Johannes Dewender]

I am in slight disagreement with 
http://musicbrainz.org/doc/DiscogsRelationshipType
Especially the line:
Do not add relationships to pending releases from Discogs. You never 
know if they get accepted.

I also expressed this in
http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=9091912

Before I mess with the Style Council, I would rather discuss this on the 
ML first.

pre-text:
I am also a discogs user, but only a fresh one that has only seen V4 
from the inside and the rest only from the outside. I mainly work on 
MB, because it is the better DB for me and on discogs I get punished 
for small corrections, when the release I correct is in a bad shape in 
the first place. I can't vote there.

Reasoning:
After changes to the voting system of discogs there are many technical 
flaws that prevent the community effectively on voting and the 
community there is very unhappy about the situation. Somebody that is 
involved a bit longer in discogs might give a summary, If needed.

So every added release, but also every tiny edit in discogs will lead to 
a release that is marked yellow/needing review/vote. Very often it 
stays like that for month, maybe even longer.
When you are not logged in in discogs you only see a yellow release that 
needs a vote. You don't see if the release was just added or if it 
exists since years and only a small change was made. You also don't see 
how long it is waiting for a review already.

If you see an error in an existing release or a wrong release and have 
an account at discogs you can correct it or add a correct release and 
the release will be marked yellow afterwards.
Referring to our style guidelines, you couldn't link to the correct(ed) 
release, probably for months, but you can link to it when you don't 
correct it (if the tracklist matches). This wouldn't be a problem when 
it would get reviewed somewhat fast or we would have a chance to see 
what part of the release is questionable, but this is not the case at 
the moment.

Linking to discogs is valuable for me because:
You have pictures of the cover (and can upload some)
You might have release information that is not yet added to MB.
You might have an overview over multi-disc releases and slightly 
different releases, that are not distinguishable on MB.


I would just remove that one sentence from the guideline and let common 
sense come into play. It is still valid to say, that this release needs 
review and one might think about not adding it, but you can also have a 
look at the release and decide for yourself if it is valid or not.


--JonnyJD
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.musicbrainz.org/pipermail/musicbrainz-users/attachments/20080721/2b1cbfce/attachment.pgp