History:Prefer Specific Relationship Types Proposal: Difference between revisions
(Initial draft for proposal) |
m (→Prefer Specific Relationship Types: Change header of generic types list) |
||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
In these cases you should use the specific relationship types, and omit a relationship of the generic type. If you feel the generic type is more appropriate - for example, if the evidence provides conflicting information - then add your reasons and supporting information to the edit note and an annotation. This will help voters confirm your analysis and will make sure other editors are aware of the background when doing later edits. |
In these cases you should use the specific relationship types, and omit a relationship of the generic type. If you feel the generic type is more appropriate - for example, if the evidence provides conflicting information - then add your reasons and supporting information to the edit note and an annotation. This will help voters confirm your analysis and will make sure other editors are aware of the background when doing later edits. |
||
The following relationship types are considered 'generic types': |
|||
* [[Arranger_Relationship_Type|Arranger]] |
* [[Arranger_Relationship_Type|Arranger]] |
||
* [[Engineer_Relationship_Type|Engineer]] |
* [[Engineer_Relationship_Type|Engineer]] |
||
Revision as of 15:33, 16 November 2010
| Status: This page describes an active proposal and is not official. |
|
|
This proposal adds the following section to Advanced Relationship Style.
Prefer Specific Relationship Types
You should make a best effort to make the relationship type as specific as possible. This means that you should avoid any of the generic types, if:
- The liner or another source specifies which of the subtypes apply, or
- You can easily deduce which of the subtypes apply.
In these cases you should use the specific relationship types, and omit a relationship of the generic type. If you feel the generic type is more appropriate - for example, if the evidence provides conflicting information - then add your reasons and supporting information to the edit note and an annotation. This will help voters confirm your analysis and will make sure other editors are aware of the background when doing later edits.
The following relationship types are considered 'generic types':
- Arranger
- Engineer
- Engineer Position
- Performer
- Writer (proposed)
Examples (todo):
- (example liner): liner explains Engineer role
- (deduce): writer on instrumental track
- (unclear): controversial writer
