Alright, thank you.

https://www.metal-archives.com/albums/G ... ute/511709
Track 5 is originally by Hoola Bandoola Band, then it was covered by Imperiet. Now it says "Imperiet cover", probably because that's the version Grimlair covered, with or without knowledge about the original band. Should that remain and the original band be mentioned in the additional notes, or should the band in parentheses be changed?

I'm currently in contact with the band leader of Act of Creation.
He told me that Jordan Flagg/J.F. is the band's mascot/imaginary member. However, J.F. gets impersonated by one of the other members on the studio albums (see debut album; haven't gotten info on the others yet).
They don't want the actual member to become public. I added a note to the band and artist page, is it okay to leave him as a "dummy entry" since there is someone doing the actual vocals under that alias?

Here's also an interview where the band states that exact same thing:
http://www.metalunderground.at/intervie ... -interview

Yeah, mention the ur-version in the notes.


I would delete the dummy entry and keep it to the note.

Changed

I have noticed, that even when Matenrou Opera finally got accepted, they are still listed in the rules as an example of an unacceptable visual kei band. If a change should be made, I would personally propose replacing them with The gazette, since tthey can serve as an perfecct example of a nu-metal based visual kei band. https://www.metal-archives.com/content/rule
NMany users also constantly ask about this band on the "rejected bands" thread.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnhwQf1Y0PU
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCEsInI ... foAZX7nVdQ

Users, old and new, keep adding streaming-only releases. Even those who stopped adding YouTube releases ages ago are still adding releases put under "Albums" on Bandzone regardless of the fact that they're not available for download. Could we have a post on the main page concerning Bandzone releases, please? It doesn't have to be long and elaborate. That'd be most appreciated. Thank you.

How to proceed when a band change the tracklist of an album on bandcamp and the album is already added to the discog here with the old tracklist?

There's an upcoming policy change for digital bands in general, I can include that with the announcement then.


Depends. If there's been some time between the original and the change, keep it and mention the subsequent alteration in the additional notes. If it's more like a quick "correction" on the band's part like a day or two after they uploaded it, do the opposite.

@Witcher: I'll let the owners know.

Ok, thanks.

EDIT:

Referring to the split of Kurgan / Regressor, the tracklists are different for each band's bandcamp, i.e., Regressor's bandcamp has one tracklist and Kurgan's bandcamp has another one and I can't change the tracklists independently. How to proceed in this case?

Bandcamp: Regressor
Bandcamp: Kurgan

How would you suggest listing the vocalists for Visions of Atlantis? Neither the male nor female vocalist is the main frontperson, they share 50% of the vocals. At the moment, the line-up looks awful, misleading and is also full of inconsistencies... in some albums the female vocalists have the tag, while in others they don't... all male vocalists have the simple role "Vocals"... it's a mess! I was just about to remove "female" from every single album line-up, but then realized I should probably ask here first.

In this particular case, I wouldn't oppose to adding "Vocals (male)" - the band has had many vocalist changes and it would be easy to navigate this way. We could also just use "Vocals" for both genders... these are our two choices. Listing "vocals" for the males and "vocals (female)" for some but not all females just looks pathetic. What do you think is best?

Danke sehr!

If a track is instrumental, we've toggled "Instrumental?" on; what about the song title: "Title" or "Title (instrumental)"?
Like here: https://www.metal-archives.com/albums/H ... ory/733320

Sure. Not quite the announcement to include it with I had in mind, but whatever works.


Unless it's an explicit part of the title, don't.

Hey, just quoting this so it doesn't get lost.

The strangest thing happened, I found a release with no songs. Never seen that before. At first I thought the browser might be messed up in loading the information, but even when clicking on the edit button, there were no songs. And according to the modification history, it had been that way since its addition in January 2017. Anyway, I added the tracks.

https://www.metal-archives.com/albums/T ... ght/625955

That occasionally happens when changing which version is the parent.

30 pages, I may have missed an answer to the following questions. I have been largely inactive for a while, so:

When should one file a report before making changes? Some reports do generate a bit of discussion before a change is made or not - and some changes definitely should be discussed before being committed. (Not gonna call out examples here.)
Or is it so that once one has privileges to change [whatever], then one is expected to do so without involving the reporting red tape?

I still file reports to have a second opinion sometimes. There's no shame in that no matter your rank. And if the homework's done properly: sources linked, it should be no bother for whoever's taking care of it, I suppose.

I see your smiley, of course.

Not everyone reads every language, so it isn't necessarily straightforward for every mod or contributor to tell whether a given source in a foreign language it is indeed taken from a public register that verifies that person x really has this name, or this record really says that the company is closed down and whether this entity really is that record label and not just some document that is declared obsoleted, or ... and put that together with site policy questions.

But in any case, a report does more than just asking for a second opinion: it logs the source given for future use.
(Once upon a time it could very well even happen, if enough goats are sacrificed, that someone would read reports before going on an edit spree :-o)

And so I did not really ask for [the need for a policy on] when one could file a report before committing changes, but when/whether one should.

Anybody can confirm this demo exists?
https://www.metal-archives.com/albums/M ... emo/527208

Can't find any info regarding this demo in the internet.

^ The user who added it isn't very trustworthy. Dia used to remove his shit whenever he came across it. So, I think no one can confirm its existence (or non-existence for that matter).

Question:
If the "about" section of a band's FB page says the band is signed to a certain label, whereas their Bandcamp says their latest album is self-released, is the band signed or unsigned?
E.g.
https://www.facebook.com/pg/sixofswords ... e_internal
https://sixofswords.bandcamp.com/
Photo: https://f4.bcbits.com/img/0014555960_10.jpg
PS. I'm not talking about a band's signing taking place after the date on which their latest album is released.

Depends. Either they didn't update their facebook info (most likely), they are no longer signed to the label, they only had a one-record deal or something with the label or they are just releasing this on their own for some other reason. Might get a vinyl release from the label later.

So, better leave the page as is until they've made public the fact they aren't signed anymore. Correct?