History talk:Artist Intent Vs Facts Proposal

From MusicBrainz Wiki

Perhaps it would be best to let someone familiar with the band (i.e. A Big Fan) decide what the artist intends, judging by websites, interviews etc. Musicians are fallible, we're fallible, but the database should be as close to the (tentatively said) intention as possible. I don't think anyone wants their typo immortalised in thousands of music files. --MichelleW

Also the case where the track listing is printed with subtitles, but the tracks are "commonly known" by their main title only, in bootlegs; eg. http://www.musicbrainz.org/showalbum.html?albumid=117607; there is another version of pretty much the same album without subtitles http://www.musicbrainz.org/showalbum.html?albumid=205420. (Not to mention that on the album cover, there's full stops everywhere.) This is even more difficult if the official website/discography is inconsistent. Should the tracks be changed to fit in with the stylistic features (which the musicians don't use most of the time either) or should both versions be kept so MB-users can choose which way they'd like their files tagged? --MichelleW

Regarding the first issue, I think we should always go with the cover unless there's compelling evidence to the contrary (eg those raised in the second issue). I say this for 2 reasons:

  • ConsistentOriginalData means that even if something wasn't "intended" (that's no to say it was a "mistake", but no real thought went into it), it can reach proliferation across an artists catalogue to the extent where it would confuse users if this abnormality was not there. Eg, the Dinosaur Jr. Greatest Hits maintains the lack of apostrophes on titles as per the original albums.
  • We can never really be sure of an artists intent on any one instance of a trackname. What looks like a typo may be of some importance (eg "Nightquest/guest"), so it's best to leave it. After all, we can't be "wrong" if we're representing covers until a contrary ArtistIntent is proven, so I think we should wait for that instead of trying to pre-empt it. --Gecks

What about albums that are intentionally re-released with new titles etc?

Again I don't have links to specific cases, but it sometimes happens that the exact same album has different titles between printings. Should they be the same or different database record?

Here is an example same song 2 titles : Dieu que pour toi (95) = Au diable nos adieux (96). Jesus2099 16:19, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Keep in mind that this is a dead and failed proposal; it's here only for historical purposes. 15:31, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Ah! :D Jesus2099 11:34, 25 November 2010 (UTC)