Talk:Label: Difference between revisions
From MusicBrainz Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
((Imported from MoinMoin)) |
((Imported from MoinMoin)) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{LabelsStatus}} |
|||
{{LabelNavigation}} |
|||
=Discussion about labels= |
=Discussion about labels= |
||
[[Label Sort Name|LabelSortName]]: |
|||
<small>[[Label]] > Label Discussion </small> |
|||
* At that time, there are no known cases of two or more "collaborating" labels jointly issuing a release (please don't confuse this with distributors/holding mentioned on sleeves), so there should theoretically be no need for rules regarding collaborations. |
|||
* The last point (4) of label [[Sortname|SortName]] style may be discussed, and one may argue that some label can use the name of their founder, and that such names may follow the usual artist [[Sortname Style|SortNameStyle]]. I don't think so, and I would like to see concrete examples before taking decision and add additional sorting rules. -- [[User:dmppanda|dmppanda]] 18:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC) |
|||
{{ |
{{LabelIntertwingling}} |
||
[[Category:Label]] [[Category:Discussion]] |
[[Category:Label]] [[Category:Discussion]] |
||
Revision as of 19:35, 4 April 2007
Discussion about labels
- At that time, there are no known cases of two or more "collaborating" labels jointly issuing a release (please don't confuse this with distributors/holding mentioned on sleeves), so there should theoretically be no need for rules regarding collaborations.
- The last point (4) of label SortName style may be discussed, and one may argue that some label can use the name of their founder, and that such names may follow the usual artist SortNameStyle. I don't think so, and I would like to see concrete examples before taking decision and add additional sorting rules. -- dmppanda 18:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
