User:Reosarevok/Abbreviations vote

From MusicBrainz Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search

Hi! Since there seem to be opinions on all sides for the "should we keep expanding abbreviations" debate, I'm going to run a wider vote to see what people think. I'll take a look at the results at the end of January or start of February and take a decision with the info :)

Please choose one of the options below for each pair, and "vote" by signing under it (using the "your signature" icon). If you only have an opinion on one of the two issues, then feel free to vote just once! Feel free to add any comment with your vote, but please use either the mailing list or the forum for any discussion longer than just a vote comment.

Discussion: /

There are two related, but independent, discussions here:

Expand all abbreviations

Keep all as is. "Pt." should be expanded to "Part", "Vol." should be expanded to "Volume" (or its language equivalents), etc.

  • Murdos (talk) 06:45, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Sc-content (talk) 08:22, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
  • There's more to abbreviations than just part numbers. It also applies to things like "inst.", "RMX", or "alt. take" – which didn't turn up in the discussion – where consistency is king. KRSCuan (talk) 08:13, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Dainis (talk) 09:52, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Don't expand abbreviations

Keep things like "Pt." and "Vol.", if that's what the cover says.

Standardise titles for series

Allow keeping series standardised if inconsistent. If most say "Volume" then use "Volume" for all (same for "Vol." or "Tome" or whatever). So, in a series labeled as "Vol. 1", "Vol. 2", "Vol. III", "Vol. 4", "Vol. III" could be changed to "Vol. 3" (or Volume 3, if you voted to expand abbreviations, anyway).

Keep titles as per the release

Keep the actual numbering and titling, even if their style changes through a series - series entities and series numbers already do all that's needed.