Talk:Style/Principle/Error correction and artist intent

From MusicBrainz Wiki
< Talk:Style‎ | Principle
Revision as of 19:15, 15 March 2009 by Nikki (talk | contribs)

... about Principles

Note to WikiZens:

These items ArtistIntent and ConsistentOriginalData still need to be explained. I don't have the time to do that now.

Also, please link to StylePrinciple from every guideline. This page NeedsIntertwingling massively. --DonRedman

... about Exceptions

Yary Hluchan posted the following to the MailingList in a discussion about the application of StyleGuidelines. It is a very good example of the reasoning that is intended by the StylePrinciple (Feel free to change this to make it a better example --DonRedman

  • "My problem with this is not that I disagree entirely, but as I see it, the fundamental difference between the "consistency" people like Kiara and myself on one hand, and the "artist intent" people like DJKC and losten on the other, is what is part of a title. The consistency people see remix and version information as additional meta-data that isn't part of the title itself, even if it is added by the artist, with intent, in a particular format." (follow the link above to read the complete mail)

Artist Intent is one of the most powerful arguments we have here so I think we need to define when exactly it applies. In many cases we're claiming "Artist Intent" based solely off an album cover or artist's official page, I know I do it all the time. But this leads to alot of people going against capitalization guidelines because the font on the CD cover doesn't use capitals anywhere, or vice versa. I think we all need to remember that as the most powerful argument in an edit, Artist Intent should be the one requireing the most proof. In many situations the artist intent is obvious such as Linkin Park's Reanimation but we have to differentiate actual Artist Intent from a web or CD cover designer that thinks a certain font "looks cool". --Kerensky97