Proposal talk:Track Title: Difference between revisions

From MusicBrainz Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
m (Talk:Track Title moved to Proposal talk:Track Title: This claimed to be a proposal... I guess it is, somehow?)
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 8: Line 8:


Tracks that are part of a multi-track (non-Classical) suite seem to be painfully absent from this guideline. [[User:Torc|Torc]] 10:32, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Tracks that are part of a multi-track (non-Classical) suite seem to be painfully absent from this guideline. [[User:Torc|Torc]] 10:32, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


----

Regarding the ordering of "feat info" and ETI, in the same track, please reference http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=14166316 - and please note that this proposal currently is inconsistent in that same ordering. [[User:99.243.33.163|99.243.33.163]] 22:18, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 12:38, 12 November 2011

How about a NonAlbumTrackStyle? Maybe that's a special version of TrackAttributesStyle? It should contain more information than 'normal' tracks to distinguish different versions of tracks. --Zout

Think the description of ordering should have a verbage change. -more relevant-, To me the remix details are more relevant to the (feat. artist) Ice Cube in the second example or you would say the (feat. artist) is more relevant to the remix details being it's only for that edition. --teleGUISE




Tracks that are part of a multi-track (non-Classical) suite seem to be painfully absent from this guideline. Torc 10:32, 18 November 2010 (UTC)



Regarding the ordering of "feat info" and ETI, in the same track, please reference http://musicbrainz.org/show/edit/?editid=14166316 - and please note that this proposal currently is inconsistent in that same ordering. 99.243.33.163 22:18, 10 March 2011 (UTC)