sanberg101 wrote:

I have lost my words here..
http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1990176#latest

fallguy wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=524110#latest

Germany or Europe?

loukash wrote:

A patient voter/helper required here:
http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=pussygon

Dr.SultanAszazin wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/submiss...item=release/1969110

asked him to change a credit, quick reaction.
I'm on CIP right now, and cannot vote myself

maurydj wrote:

Hello to All
Please:

Wonder if anyone can verify the release of this user http://www.discogs.com/user/funky_kitchen

Uses much the draft copy, it makes no correction when it is asked
Is very interested in selling discs,
and Little Respect for the DB -

Many Thanks

p.s. SORRY for my BAD English -

DriesBosma wrote:

I'm not so good in detecting websubs, but sven_tena admitted it for this case: http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1993518#latest , so that was an easy one.

Other submissions also look suspicious with all those low-res pics.

Maybe good to have a look for the real 'websub hunters'.

Mr.Mystery wrote:

By the way he's avoiding all question I'd say most of his subs are websubs.

hmvh wrote:

Oh, how I miss the days when we could quickly fix up a user's sub and then knock it in ourselves... http://www.discogs.com/Killer-...hers/release/1372003
Thanks.

maurydj wrote:

Please
see this

http://www.discogs.com/submiss...item=release/1994363

http://www.discogs.com/submiss...item=release/1992326

http://www.discogs.com/submiss...item=release/1914565

- Thx -

Internaut wrote:

I don't have the energy: MYRECORDCOLLECTIONUK

djindio wrote:

Websub:
http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1976837#latest

maurydj wrote:

- The worst... is never dead -

loukash wrote:

Could these be web subs as well?
http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=ozboyz
It seems rather unlikely to me that someone owns 9 versions of the same record:
http://www.discogs.com/history?master=44217
(although, you never know, of course… :)
In any case, the submitter may need some help…

Mr.Mystery wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1995712#latest

Fun times.

silverleaf wrote:

Made some progress, but if there's someone that speaks Italian perhaps there would be better understanding.
http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1962639#latest I wasn't asking for the artist name to be changed, just an ANV.
Checking several titles, the P.F.M. getting writing credit is an ANV of Premiata Forneria Marconi. Instead of an ANV the credit was simply changed.

Edit: Awsome! Thank you, I think that would be great.

maurydj wrote:

Hello Tom

If I'm allowed I can speak Italian
Let's understand this better

- maury -

loukash wrote:

OK, the submitter claims being a collector, so all should be legit.
Some help may still be needed in his case though.

jweijde wrote:

Not a websub. The submitter had the release.


User seems to be just some seller who isn't totally aware how things work, but he doesn't look like a bad submitter. His intentions seem to be good atleast.

swagski wrote:

Newish voter & new to dealing with this kind of 'site abuse'.
it's odd, the poster isn't new to the system.
I've commented. Anyone else want to comment?
Inserts (2) - Out Of The Box

marcelrecords wrote:

So you think...
I have 15 album versions of ''A hard day's night''... ;-}}

Mr.Mystery wrote:

That was most definitely not worth an EI vote.

swagski wrote:

What would you have given it?
I rarely give even NMC votes, and give time to let subbers make corrs, but this sub is a bit naughty.
Surely, the submitter has been present since 2007 and the content, although 'correct' in content, is clearly an advertisement and the subber knows full well it's wrong.
It would be helpful to know, as I asked, how to proceed.

Mr.Mystery wrote:

The data was most likely correct - it just needed to have the notes removed and credits moved to their correct place. Definitely not Entirely Incorrect.

I really don't see where you come off with this "site abuse" thing.

MUSICLOVER04 wrote:

This user is confused about the "Country" field purpose.
Some voting guidance?
http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=shunt
Cheers.

loukash wrote:

Yes, in the meantime I stand corrected… :)

But I know a user who is systematically submitting all versions of old albums and who admitted he doesn't own many of them. Suffice to say there are errors in his submissions. So far, nobody could stop him, as far as I can say. I have already requested putting him on CIP, but I don't think it happened.

swagski wrote:

In other words it's far from correct...
There are no existing credits. Everything is buried in Notes, which is a piece of self-promotional text with embedded URLs to external 'profit-oriented' locations created by the submitter.

How many promotional re-directs from other Web-spots could have been sent to this?
http://www.discogs.com/Inserts...-Box/release/1854473

•This band consisted of Richard Isgrigg (me) on guitar
•distribution by our label Nozzle Records.
•we also did live radio performances
•We headlined
•In the 90’s I reformed the group
•"Out of the Box" will be available on CD shortly
•There are plans to release several other Inserts CDs over the coming year
•I’m currently looking for musicians for an updated version of the group and welcome inquiries
•make sure to check out the related myspace site http://www.myspace.com/inserts2
•my personal site http://www.myspace.com/richardisgrigg for more mp3s
•Thanks for stopping by

So, next time I do a sub or comment maybe I'll add a URL to my local grocery store or garage. You'll say, "Fine, just remove the URL and I'll vote it OK"? (No prob, I'll get free promo 'till you notice it)...

Don't get me wrong. I want this release in. Just think the subber has a bit of a cheek and advice would be useful, rather than an all out attack on my action. Am I missing something?

jweijde wrote:

But not Entirely Incorrect.
All those notes need to be removed and the format should be updated - you're right on that - but the rest of the sub looks fine to me.

swagski wrote:

Thanks jweijde
Get the drift. I shall tiptoe next time.
Any thoughts on how this needs tackling? Left comment, no vote.
It's been voted "Correct"
http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1652656#latest

ahlbomper wrote:

i would probably have left a similar comment. (the difference needs to be described in the release data. good notes or image)
others might have given it a vote right away
(i'm actually not sure which vote would be fitting here ? from sub-notes i'm sure it's no dupe, but it's not clear from release-data)
anyway i think this submitter will respond to the comment.

maurydj wrote:

Please
see this=> http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1998752#latest

seems a duplicate
- Thx

silverleaf wrote:

Maury, did you have any luck with talking to that guy about P.F.M.?

maurydj wrote:

- Hello -
Yes Tom
We exchanged some emails, now he was placed in the CIP, but seems he willing to not ask for help and advice....

silverleaf wrote:

Thanks for the help on that. He's got some interesting subs, but the quality just didn't seem to be what it should.

legumes-SALES wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1112252

Please vote Correct on this sub. The voter here is claiming that it's a different orchestra which is plain wrong.

swagski wrote:

Been commenting on this user's subs. They're generally accurate, he responds, etc., but I note he doesn't appear to own any! He's a seller. Is he just accruing points as a hobby or is this what's known as a websubber?
http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=joeybolt

consort wrote:

at first glance, I question the general accuracy actually

that's ok

maybe? or bored at his desk job? or whatever ... nothing wrong with it

no, definitely not! :)

Mop66 wrote:

Kinks, The - State Of Confusion: We're in danger of changing this back and forth. The last edit even did not change the country as intended but only removed the Cat which made it Needs Minor changes IMO as it's now neither what he wants it to be nor what I think is correct. I still believe the country should b Uk & Europe here. So please vote this either C or EI, I will accept what the Final outcome will ever be.

DriesBosma wrote:

What is this guy doing?
http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=DjO55

Editing submissions without editing them?

rile3e wrote:

Can some one help out here please http://www.discogs.com/history?release=2003786#latest

Sorry can't find request on MY votes anywhere. Too many noobs being given voting stuff. Look at his stats.

Se-BusT-eL wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1689247#latest

consort wrote:

Has received a total of 16 votes. Pending submissions not too encouraging atm.

swagski wrote:

Any idea why "Guitars, Vocals" hasn't thrown up a

The following warnings were presented to the submitter:
- One or more credit roles do not match the credit list?

here http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1962145#latest
Is it a software bug? Am I missing something?

swagski wrote:

Yes I am. "5" wasn't entered. Forget it. Apologies

muntz wrote:

not really correct: http://www.discogs.com/history?release=47381

Dr.SultanAszazin wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1805343#latest

This was corrected quickly after a comment, I don't have my voting enabled now (hasn't returned after a short CIP punishment for some reason...)

All is correct

legumes-SALES wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=617378

Correct

legumes-SALES wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1347223

1 year old sub

marcelrecords wrote:

left a comment there..

maurydj wrote:

Please:

Because this user with a Percentage so low, you still Active?
should be in the CIP?

http://www.discogs.com/user/olinn

- Thanks -

azzurro wrote:

someone please correct the incorrect NmaC vote on this one... http://www.discogs.com/Frantic...vers/release/1183468

Thanks in advance

Internaut wrote:

For those who have the energy: rohogo

marcelrecords wrote:

Posted a comment on one of these. Let's hope for some action there...

maurydj wrote:

As above

I want to know why this user continues to enter new release having an index of quality rating = 2.00 and those with the highest index are in the CIP ?

PLEASE:
I would like possibly a polite and courteous response

- MANY THANKS -

--> http://www.discogs.com/user/olinn

Internaut wrote:

Please see if you think this is a duplicate. I don't understand submitter, he don't understand me I think…: Allan Holdsworth - Metal Fatigue

consort wrote:

n/m

Mr.Mystery wrote:

He's only had 1 vote, it's not enough to push anyone to the CIP.

maurydj wrote:

Thanks for having responded, but I seem to remember that when you begin, you have a vote in per cent of 5

This is a another user with only one vote=> http://www.discogs.com/user/FresnoRichard

I can not understand how it can have only 2
Having received only one vote?

Jayfive wrote:

Artist making a hash of updating some of his releases and so on:
http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=oui2005

Se-BusT-eL wrote:

NMC

loukash wrote:

Yet another seller who doesn't seem to give a damn about the correctness of data he's submitting:
http://www.discogs.com/submiss...ser=christofchristof

maurydj wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/I-Gigan...itto/release/2017228

Is a correct answer? in the second picture you can clearly see the song titles, my observation is targeted to a specific request for correction
is possible that even in the face of reality is denied the evidence

Many Thanks

maurydj wrote:

Wish to Thank " Tom silverleaf " for the accuracy demonstrated in this opportunity

and ask for some voters to be deprived of the opportunity to vote, why not show sufficient experience and, above all, too much impulsiveness

- Many Thanks -

legumes-SALES wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1167762

Needs to be sorted, preferrably by the voters who already dealt with this. ;)

legumes-SALES wrote:

Fair enough. I still believe that hard-trance deserves the C for the alias fix. ;) I do the title afterwards, in case noone else does.

legumes-SALES wrote:

???

I remember someone maintaining a List of commonly misused artist and label profiles, this would sure qualify. Both entries needs sorting.

swagski wrote:

Just added to a 6 year-old sub. http://www.discogs.com/Technot...-Over/release/130698
Noticed a 6 month-old dupe? in MR. Left comment therein. http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1722571#latest
Help/thoughts appreciated...

muntz wrote:

i told him so often what "Written By" stands for, i give up: http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1534687#latest

drcscape wrote:

NOT complete and correct:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1985560#latest

Salutaurs wrote:

How this release can be voted correct if there is even more mistakes than before?

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1224010#latest

I don't understand the reason of voting then, is it to improve database or to show the power?

And by the way all Brainstorm (6) releases have disputable as voted now
according to:
http://www.discogs.com/help/fo...topic/200030#preview

Internaut wrote:

Second opinion here please: Irina Arkhipova* - Irina Arkhipova

muntz wrote:

ridiculous: http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1500257

Mr.Mystery wrote:

Something to go through here:

http://www.discogs.com/artist/Frenchie+%286%29

I'd do it myself but I don't have the time right now.

thefoureyedfox wrote:

Is this valid?

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=2027203#latest

I'm guessing no.

loukash wrote:

And this?



http://www.discogs.com/history?release=2016054
(same guy as above)

swagski wrote:

I can't seem to vote on this.
http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1247262#latest
A "select vote" doesn't appear...is it my system?

loukash wrote:

You can't. You were the last one who edited the release. "Images" and "Master Release" don't count as edits.
If SeRKeT's images don't match the actual release, simply disable them.*

*) Correction: actually it's SeRKeT's submission, so if your version doesn't match his images, you may want to remove the notes and submit your own version.

swagski wrote:

Doh! Couldn't see the wood for the trees
Thanx loukash
It wasn't my system, just my brain.

Internaut wrote:

Second opinion here please: King Crimson - Lizard

Se-BusT-eL wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1501569#latest

NMC

Unint wrote:

What do you do with people who go around indiscriminately adding their own credits to all the releases they supposedly appear on? 134DaBear

I already gave him one EI on a seriously botched edit ( http://www.discogs.com/history?release=946174 ), along with a detailed explanation, but for the rest of his edits I can't so easily verify the degree of correctness. Haven't received any indication that he even noticed the vote or my comments.

maurydj wrote:

Hello to All

I kindly ask you to see the release of this user--> http://www.discogs.com/user/matteo1929

do not respond to requests that he are made ...
to be a Voter....
in these cases, helps, to understand ...

- Thanks -

hmvh wrote:

If he doesn't respond in a timely manner (PM the user), consider it sabotage and "EI" the lot.

hmvh wrote:

Here's possible candidate for a certain improvement program: http://www.discogs.com/release...uted?user=cruudeuces

I'd love to climb into it -- but it's waaaay past my bed time.

djindio wrote:

Needs one or two more NmiC votes.
http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1388263#latest

...the release is bate to set someone up for a neg vote if they try to correct the missing ANV as the track time for one track is missing. User is still active discogs user but hasn't responded.

Mr.Mystery wrote:

Please check this out as I have no idea what's going on:

http://www.discogs.com/Michael...lker/release/2033663

Is it even a musical piece? Is it a movie or what? Why are the credits all wrong?

muntz wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1522007
thanks

legumes-SALES wrote:

It's a movie and def. not valid for discogs.

and someone already added it to IMDB.com
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095655/

JeroenDeGraaff wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=353305#latest

I think it should be up for removal.

muntz wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/Couch-E...tzen/release/1500257
thanks again

Internaut wrote:

Keeps pumping out subs, with major errors, ignores every vote: balloony

marcelrecords wrote:

Left a comment with two of these...see what happens.

maurydj wrote:

Please to All

how can you comment this release? - Thanks

see this => http://www.discogs.com/history?release=2038910#latest

swagski wrote:

Support from Beefheart fans please.
This has errors, some I began fixing, but is older/fuller (51 owners) than the potential dupe I've flagged in comments therein, with no response...
http://www.discogs.com/Captain...r-Man/release/638859
(The Notes may have been 'lifted' and have no bearing?)

maurydj wrote:

Please

wonder if anyone wants to check the release of this user=> http://www.discogs.com/user/ghostalking

I tried to make him understand that, he can not write in Portuguese language, artists and credits on the space reserved for notes.???

- Thanks -

thefoureyedfox wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/user/SubverseRadio
http://www.discogs.com/user/fykfyk

muntz wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=95809#latest
thanks

DriesBosma wrote:

A user that will have rank 1000000 soon for adding "Speed Garage" to every release...

http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=Mykee

KrissO wrote:

Stubbornism:
Mat Zo - Default / Rush 2009
http://www.discogs.com/history?release=2038933

maurydj wrote:

Hello, I found these two release:
http://www.discogs.com/Posion-...n-Me/release/1396569

http://www.discogs.com/Poison-...n-Me/release/2040852

The first one is the oldest, the second one has been submited recently.
If you look at them you can see that they are the same but in the first one the label is wrong, in the second one it is correct but it lacks in credits and notes.
I'm asking you to check them because I don't know how to treat them.
Thank you

tiorted wrote:

I've got 2 I need an opinion on:
White Stripes, The - Let's Shake Hands
White Stripes, The - Lafayette Blues / Sugar Never Tasted So Good

should the label really be "Italy Records, Italy Records"

submitters rationale: "cat#s as they appear on the release (006 on the sleeve and center labels, I 006 on the dead wax)" & "cat#s that are actually printed on the release (003 on the sleeve/center labels, I 003 on the dead wax)"

I'm not agreeing with this