User:HumHumXX

From MusicBrainz Wiki
Revision as of 10:13, 26 February 2013 by HumHumXX (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigationJump to search
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

MusicBrainz | MusicBrainz Forums | Last.fm

To Do: Mend record player, clean all records, re-add collection, then watch it. Moan, whine, bitch and complain during every stage.


Modest proposals:

  • Warn, then ban exceptionally bad editors (more than 5% down-voted edits and/or no reaction to other editors' notes).
  • Highlight new editors, maybe on the front page. (BTW, why are people following auto-editors' edits, not those of new editors, who actually do need supervision?)
  • Get rid of "Yes" and "Abstain", introduce "Ignore" or "Don't Care" as a voting option; auto-editors should still be able to approve edits.
  • Mark accepted releases that have not been voted on as such, if possible even retrospectively; let editors additionally mark releases that have issues and serious issues. A note addressing the (potential) problem should be obligatory.
  • Revoke auto-editor privileges after, say, one year of inactivity. They should be able to apply for getting them back by simply posting to the list -- or the forums, see also below.


  • Let a bot adjust release group titles/artists to release titles/artists if there's only one release in a release group, or if there's two or more releases that are identical in those respects.
  • Let it do the same for recordings ... -- yeah, I know.
  • (... or, regarding artists, disable release group/recording artist credits; except for collaborations, of course.)


  • Except for the artist or label level, do not allow linking to websites other than those that can guarantee stable links -- in short, death to purchase, download, discography ARs, etc., if they weren't dead already.
  • The remaster ARs are all useless and/or wrong, and I'm only slightly exaggerating. Get rid. No report, no fixing, get rid. Seriously. Maybe add an attribute instead.
  • Attributes! (I'll need to further elaborate on this on another occasion.)


  • Add "Series" as an option for labels instead of adding a hyper-complicated architecture for such a trivial concept.
  • Retain "Bootlegger" and "Holding" as label types, maybe "Publisher" as well, but remove the rest, unless ...
  • we let editors add companies (for (c) and (p), manufacturing, etc.). This is also the only way a meaningful parent/sub-label hierarchy can be established.


  • Do not show artist disambiguations except in search results.
  • Only show "core" edits to an entity in its editing history; for instance, *no* recording edits in a release history.


  • Close the user *and* the style mailing list, move to the forums. The regular internet user these days has no idea what a mailing list is, and they're clearly not missing out on anything.
  • Point users to IRC for the quick question, to the forums for more complicated concerns.


  • What exactly is the use of the docs and the transclusion mechanism? Why not use the wiki and simply lock the pages that need RFCs to be changed?


  • ...