As expected, December was a little slower than November, with Submissions down 4%. However that doesn’t seem to capture the hard work a lot of Contributors have been putting into the various ‘cleaning projects’ floating around in the Database Forums (see the From The Database Forum section below for more details).
After a very successful first attempt at translating a small section of the Submission Guidelines into Spanish, we’re ready to kick off a large scale project to translate them, in full, into Spanish, French, Italian, German and Japanese. Stay tuned for details on how you can help if you’d like participate, details will be coming within the next month.
Top Contributors In December
From The Database Forum
- CLEANING PROJECT: Invalid Artists with Releases attributed to them: early in November, coopzilla started a clean up project to move all the Releases cataloged under Artists that had been marked as ‘Invalid’ over to the correct Artists. That’s no mean feat, so we made a list of the most numerous Invalid Artists (by volume of Releases in their name), which dozens of contributors have been working through. Colonycollapse23, palemovie, kkuenz56, velove, F104G and theoneillster all deserve special mention for helping make Discogs the most organised and consistent music database in that has ever existed.
There are currently just over 27,000 Releases cataloged under Invalid Artists, with new Invalid Artists discovered each week, but the total number has been dropping by about 5% every week. Big big thanks to all involved, stellar effort across the board.
- Case for Included Downloads and Change to Rule 1.1.4: kaganbuck‘s thoughtful and detailed essay on an already well-debated topic – the conflict between RSG §1.1.3 and RSG §1.1.4 regarding digital download cards included in physical media releases – is an exemplary case of how the Discogs Database Guidelines have been developed over 18 years: from thoughtful community lead initiatives to define a consistent way of cataloging all the music in the world. Should the 12″ and its downloadable counterpart be cataloged as separate Releases or not? 94 replies and 24,000 words later, will we see an update to the Guidelines?
- CLEANING PROJECT: Releases with HTML to be removed from Release page: After a request from by llllllllllIIIIIIIIII in late November, I spent some time digging into Releases submitted to Discogs from the early 2000s to discover many had been tagged with HTML write up in the Release Notes. 42,000, in fact. Often the markup was intended to designate matrix runouts or credit roles, which now need to be moved to the the correct field. This thread lists 500 Releases in need of a bit of elbow grease, and is updated every Tuesday with fresh Releases to be scrubbed. A great way to learn about how to catalog music on Discogs, and also to learn about some music you might not have heard otherwise.
- [RESOLVED] Different Pressing Rings = Unique Version? Good question.
- New attempt: Royal Recording Studios, Memphis and Royal Studios merge request.: another attempt to merge label pages that represent the same physical entity.
- Composer name given on the front cover… Release artist, or not?: Some say Classical music is the hardest to catalog on Discogs, mostly because it’s common for classical music releases to list both performer(s) and composer(s) as the Main Artist.
- Radiohead – Kid A : Mess in variants = Reorganization needed.: seriously good effort from Mat.rock rallying a cleaning crew to organise the mess of variants on this seminal album. You just made the world a little easier to understand for everyone.
- Credits on Quake CD-ROMs: If you can play a CD-ROM in a CD player, is it a musical Release that should be catalogued on Discogs?
- Is Itunes / Spotify a good enough reference for Single / EP tag.: As the music landscape changes the Discogs guidelines must adapt, but are iTunes and Spotify good references for Release data? Let’s just say they’re nowhere near as good as Discogs…
- “distributed by” tag – Database Guidelines 4. Label / Catalog: If the distributor is known but not listed on the Release, under what circumstances can you credit the company?
- Someone experienced please explain why the use of “Various” of artist here: TL;DR – as per RSG §12.3, Various (the 194th Artist entered into Discogs) should be used “when there are several different artists on a release, and no one is billed as the main artist”.
New To The Database
There were no additions to the Guidelines in December.
Overview Of How Discogs Is Built
Check out the
Quick Start Guide For New Contributors