History talk:Data Track Style

From MusicBrainz Wiki

Now that using the SpecialPurposeArtist [data track] on VariousArtists albums is an OfficialStyleGuideline, there is an exception that might be worth making; if a data track contains MP3 or other audio files, it might be worth having the artist for those MP3 files (or VariousArtists, if there are several artists) as the artist for the data track. @alex

Having the artist of a (single) musical track on a GameDisc (like the FFVII (disc 3) example above) be the primary artist for the game itself does seem be a bit odd - I put the conversion of that album from VariousArtists up for vote and am willing to take the consensus in that case as the guideline for GameDiscs with a single audio track. @alex

Historical Info

Saved here from ModerationFAQ. DeleteWhenCooked --DonRedman

  • On 13th June 2003, NeilCafferkey (the first StyleDude) wrote in musicbrainz-users:
    • The goal is that only the first session TOC of any CD should be in MB. There are CDs in MB that don't fit in with this, because there was a time when the Linux clients entered multi-session TOCs. However I don't think it's particularly urgent to remove these disc IDs. Personally, I think part of the solution is to only accept new disc IDs from up-to-date client libraries. We also need to decide what to do with the existing multi-session disc IDs. I think we can generate the first-session TOC from the multi-session TOC (the inter-session gap seems to be a constant), but we need to be sure that the original TOC is multi-session.
    For anyone who doesn't want to be concerned about TOCs, sessions etc., we can say that CDs with one final data track should have that track removed, AS LONG AS the CD has no disc IDs (hopefully we can remove that final condition within a few weeks).

Making this less visible

I kind of think this guideline and the [data] SPA should be given less visibility now that we generally don't want people using them. Right now, the message that users should exclude data tacks is buried under all the instructions telling them the precise way to do something they shouldn't do. Just seeing [data] alongside tags like [anonymous] and [unknown] gives it legitimacy. It's easy to see the guideline and assume that if we're telling users how to add data tracks, that we want those tracks included. Torc 04:40, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I do agree that it's not very clear, but I think it would be a big improvement if the page is just reworded/reorganised a bit to put the bit about removing trailing data tracks first. Feel free to create a proposal to do that. ;) Nikki 13:43, 19 July 2010 (UTC)