8m2stereo wrote:

leaving
Pending Submissions (479), gems like
http://www.discogs.com/label/Amway
&
http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=DAVIDBRUNNER

8m2stereo wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1697607
other one is removed now, this must stay,
NO please, thx.

silverleaf wrote:

Does anybody know what's up with this person editing here? http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1466425

Changed artist name, changed release & all track titles to Unknown, removed the notes completely as well as the cover art.
I thought the cover art was shopped anyway. When viewed as a negative there are color differences that look like the name at the top has been pasted in.

Any thoughts? Should this be reverted, removed or other?

jweijde wrote:

Doesn't look like those releases are put on the right label.
They all have Spain as country while Amway is a US company. Plus Amray doesn't seem to be involved in releasing music. Atleast according to their Wikipedia page.

edit: They do have a Spanish division: http://www.amway.es. I don't know if they marketed any cassettes though. Maybe someone who can read Spanish can help.

jweijde wrote:

I have IE voted it. For such a major change it does have WAY too less clarification.

legumes-SALES wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1146637


The Clap -> The Clap (3)

no change after one year

legumes-SALES wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?artist=V%2FVm

8m2stereo wrote:

very suspect subbings of rare items,
someone please double check user's 'arguments' ..
http://www.discogs.com/submiss...item=release/1274678

Theseampsgotoeleven wrote:

Couple of entries really need some work here:

I can't vote, but I think a couple of votes on these releases may get the submitters to amend.

(1) Submitter has not checked artist links on this non-music release.

http://www.discogs.com/submiss...item=release/1424669

(2) Some Clint Eastwood nonsense going on here. Not sure that the "Compilation" tag is valid as these actual recordings were probably not available prior to the release of the album.

http://www.discogs.com/submiss...item=release/1571609

Thanks

Jonny_Fused wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1465795#latest

It's a duplicate-removal issue.

Mr.Mystery wrote:

[quote=Theseampsgotoeleven][/quote]
Your links aren't working.

lol wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1424669
http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1571609

jweijde wrote:

See my comment on the submission.
What exactly makes it suspect? The provided weblink?
I understand we need to be careful, but I think we sometimes are jumping on the 'websubmission, OUT!' bandwagon too quickly.
This particular user just happens to have quite a few rare items. Let him submit them.

Mr.Mystery wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=MichaelNRW2

How is this person still not in CIP?

Mr.Mystery wrote:

Here's another:

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

Over 100 pendings, mostly faulty in some way. Has not made a single edit based on a vote/comment.

8m2stereo wrote:

sent by MichaelNRW2 to 8m2stereo on 24-May-09 09:42 PM

ok

On 05/24/09 8m2stereo wrote:
hey man, i simply can't believe you are resubmitting all this
without reading the manual
or fixing ALL your mistakes .
please fix all your pending submission before you resubmit more !!
thx.

rassel wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1720795#latest


Forget it, this guy is resubmitting his removed subs without any changes.
There are two possibilites:
1. nik could do us a favour and get him in the CIP NOW
2. You buy all his discs, remove the releases and he will have no further interests in resubmitting them again as they are sold.

stub004 wrote:

I edited a release that had format labelled as "2 x MP3" only by adding the bitrate as "320 kbps", which is the format in which I own this release and which it is most likely to be found on most online shops.

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1324555#latest

The original submitter voted "entirely incorrect" for this small edit, which I think was pretty inappropriate, regardless of whether I was correct or not.

As I understand it, MP3 bitrates are separate formats just like vinyl or CD and should be entered separately into the database and then linked using the new master release function. Can someone confirm that I'm correct?

8m2stereo wrote:

i see. worst case scenario, exactly as on any other given weekend.
as stated before
i have lost inspiration for troll-hunting due to the lack of proper tools on this site.

fisonic wrote:

What kind of tools would you find appropriate? (Or has there been a discussion regarding this in the past, which I could read?)

Jayfive wrote:

Ive put a few of them up for removal and EI'd them to ensure he gets on the CIP.

I recommend others do the same:
http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=MichaelNRW2

Clearly this fool is a seller who wants to get his stock on quick with no regard for the database. Get rid.

sanberg101 wrote:

Please help me guys. I have made Correct votes already on these two records, but in few minutes I realized, that the submitter did not put necessary info about the labels there (after looking them up on the internet), so it Needs Major Changes.
Please cast Needs Major Changes here:
http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1730888#latest
http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1730875#latest

Thanks a lot for your help!

Internaut wrote:

I give up, anyone up for it:Nicholas Bennison - The Dawning ?

8m2stereo wrote:

someone please make a move on these, subber is banned:
http://www.discogs.com/label/Epic+(Spain)
&
i've been through all and put 15 more DAVIDBRUNNER mess cleanups for removal.

8m2stereo wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=Hardtraxx2005
11 trollsubs, major Mess, no fix, no owners,
removal requested by subber.
kick back to drafts
before wasting more time on this, imho.

8m2stereo wrote:

^ & ^^ both swept out in a wink, thank you.

Internaut wrote:

Second opinions here please:

Peter Hammill - Over
Peter Hammill - In Camera

8m2stereo wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=MichaelNRW2

on cip finally, swift cleanup now please.

&

http://www.discogs.com/submissions?label=Epic+(Spain)

wrong label, no fixes, no owners, back to drafts please.

DAHOF wrote:

I need 1 votes pls..
I would like Update Artist Profile.
Thank's!!

http://www.discogs.com/DJ-Puk-...-Gum/release/1737629

disruptive-influence wrote:

sorted...no worries :)

fisonic wrote:

Seems OK, as per nik's explanation of the guidelines here: http://www.discogs.com/help/fo...topic/187404#2362665

8m2stereo wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/label/Decca+Records

should all be Decca ?

SmotheredHope wrote:

Second opinion needed here, is this ANV really correct? It says "Remixed by Chris Tsangarides" on the back of the digipak.

http://www.discogs.com/Depeche...Again/release/200035

Mr.Mystery wrote:

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

Submitter clearly cares about his own input (or someone he knows), leaving behind a complete mess of wrong artists and incomplete submissions.

SmotheredHope wrote:

Yesterdays most useful update

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=199995#latest

ptambient wrote:

need votes in favor of removal on this web-sub, please.
http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1767533#latest

Mr.Mystery wrote:

That guy is quite notorious for those. It's not once or even twice I've clashed egos with him for that.

silverleaf wrote:

In need of vote http://www.discogs.com/history?release=117194

SmotheredHope wrote:

I know... sigh. He keeps doing tiny tiny updates on a lot of Depeche Mode items which I own most of, so my inbox gets completely flooded since he keeps adding one thing at a time. :/

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=199984#latest

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=41369#latest

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=199983#latest

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=186151#latest

lol wrote:

luvdisaster

another label owner who doesn't know how to use discogs

makbo wrote:

Can one of you voters fix this?

Vince Guaraldi Trio - Cast Your Fate To The Wind / Samba De Orpheus

Correct catalog number but B side writers not linked

Vince Guaraldi Trio - Samba De Orpheus / Cast Your Fate To The Wind

Incorrect catalog but B side writers appear to be linked correctly via ANV.

Heh, just as I was composing this someone went in and voted Correct on the first one. Now what?

Mr.Mystery wrote:

Most likely everything here is a websub:

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

Everything seems to be a direct copy/paste from recess.nl. Put one up for removal, someone else might want to check the rest...

thefoureyedfox wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1782959

This person keeps resubmitting an invalid release despite numerous warnings not to resubmit it.

thefoureyedfox wrote:

Also:

http://www.discogs.com/Various...ourg/release/1795724

I highly doubt that is the actual label.

seppuku wrote:

Anyone want to vote on this?

http://www.discogs.com/Various...ound/release/1191206

I can't vote, but everything looks correct to me, and it's been waiting a while...

--

Edit: Sorted, many thanks.

SeaMonkey wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/Q-Proje...ject/release/1700639

My copy of this has sides C & D switched, as does the discography on the label's website. I'm on the CIP and can't create a new entry or adjust this one.

http://www.discogs.com/Danny-B...tion/release/1599173

It should be noted that the A-Side of this record has an infinite loop at the end and never fades to silence.

punxtr wrote:

Please vote No to the removal of this release: Weather Report - Weather Report

The cat#s are different. Thanks.

Kepe wrote:

NO they are not.

It is because some people use Cat# from LP covers, other people use Cat# from labels. On most of the 70's lp's cover cat# label cat#.

CBS Labels mostly show cat as "CBS 12345" when all covers show it as only "12345"..

It's a huge problem and I bump to such duplicates almost every day.

If they are different please use 2 catalog numbers or at least add note what they are:

Label Cat# on relase: XYZ
Cover Cat# on release: XY-Z

Thanks! =D

8m2stereo wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=frenkdj
http://www.discogs.com/artist/Frenk+DJ

i have put up ca. 80 suspected bogus crap for removal,
subber last seen 4 months ago, no reply, no owners.
vanity/joke subs, made up labels, 1 track compilations, filePromos ect.
pls kick, the remainders from have subber will probably all have to go too ..

punxtr wrote:

If the cat# is not on the physical release itself, don't use it.

Da rules: http://www.discogs.com/help/su...e-label-catalog.html

"The catalog number should be entered directly as it appears on a release - it shouldn't be altered (as has been done in the past at Discogs) for conformity with other catalog numbers listed on the label page."

Why are you fighting this?

Kepe wrote:

Lol.. I'm not. I just want to state that it's a HUGE problem with discogs people use different cat#'s from the release. Guidelines say all catalog#'s should be added, but what if the user doesn't do that and don't answer to any comments? What to do then?

Mr.Mystery wrote:

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

punxtr wrote:

Pester them with questions nicely and then wait for their response... basically get ignored! I notice this too. I usually see who else has the release and ask them if they can help me out. Some don't check every "UPDATE TO RELEASE IN YOUR COLLECTION MESSAGE" or whatever... so it helps.

Mr.Mystery wrote:

I just accidentally walked to a landmine...

http://www.discogs.com/artist/Antonio+Gregorio

Please, someone take a look, something in my head just snapped.

8m2stereo wrote:

as he states in the last sentence of his profile:
"This is a dude to watch for. "

enough votes for cip given,
sent him a PM and put all up for back to drafts.

Mr.Mystery wrote:

Most definitely.

djpileup wrote:

rofl

...white label mp3...

that's pure entertainment value in itself

silverleaf wrote:

Looks like his profile came from here http://www.thedjlist.com/djs/ANTONIO_GREGORIO/

Internaut wrote:

Can someone please help me "educate" this user and his sub: http://www.discogs.com/Deep-Pu...rple/release/1801941

My pedagogical skills are not up to it....

Mr.Mystery wrote:

I wonder if they come in a generic sleeve.

thefoureyedfox wrote:

If the file has no metadata attached to it, then they do. :P

SmotheredHope wrote:

White label mp3, what a blast. :D

jweijde wrote:

Nevermind, already voted.

Myriad wrote:

Could I get a couple correct votes on this please. It was voted correct before the NMiC vote was made, which as you can see in the history was wrongly made.

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1752255

8m2stereo wrote:

^^ is fixed now.

lol wrote:

well...

8m2stereo wrote:

^^ these most probably are "ghosts", all have been sent back to drafts, takes some time for them to disappear .. some bug recently ..

8m2stereo wrote:

HELP !

You know, I own the label .. :

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

rassel wrote:

Format: File, MP3, Reference: S0.18SVID. Object: Fiesta Slagz. Manufacturer: Baggy Kidz. Release: Fiesta Slags SVHS promotional video. 5 made. (Included on the Straight Outta Gorton CDR)

I almost prefer artists :)

Internaut wrote:

^^^ Holy §@*&! This is one of the more 'entertaining' ones: http://www.discogs.com/Studio-Lily/release/1803930

"Not a record"; looks like he is submitting the studio cat...is this the first cat in the database?

8m2stereo wrote:

"..Excellently designed and instantly attention grabbing, PuntoAparte performs it's desired function admirable.."

i just told him to grab some fesh air for a change ..

SmotheredHope wrote:

Killer subs, high entertainment value! :D

muntz wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=807000#latest
thanks

Mr.Mystery wrote:

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

I'm amazed he's still not in the CIP. Not once has he edited a single submission for the better. Might as well boot them all out.

SmotheredHope wrote:

Yes, very poor stats...

Average Vote Received: Needs Major Changes (2.16, 74 votes)
last 10 days: Needs Major Changes (2.15, 65 votes)

SmotheredHope wrote:

20-25 more NMaC given to atomicgr, lets see if the CIP picks him up...

Internaut wrote:

This user could need some additional guidance: http://www.discogs.com/submissions?user=vinylmadhouse

Internaut wrote:

Second opinion here please: http://www.discogs.com/John-Ca...-Cage/release/939917

(He have done similar things with other subs as well)..

Mr.Mystery wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1760322#latest

Person voting on own sub with some clear tracklisting issues.

8m2stereo wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/label/BMG+Music
looks fishy, but not my field of expertism ..
maybe also needs a dummy reminder placed there once someone is at it ..

djpileup wrote:

He's voted on someone else's edit of his sub. While it's not viewed as good practice, wasn't there a discussion a while ago that concluded it was allowed?

You believe it has issues so counter with a nmc vote?

SmotheredHope wrote:

He was aware of the tracklisting 'problem' (see sub notes) but still voted correct... not ok IMO. It should have been discussed further before any votes were placed.

djpileup wrote:

Yes I agree it was wrong.

I just meant to say that when some else edits your sub it becomes their sub for better or worse

Mr.Mystery wrote:

I've voted on it several times and it seems like I'm not getting through and/or am being deliberately ignored. Someone else's turn.

8m2stereo wrote:

http://www.discogs.com/label/Island

marcelrecords wrote:

shouldn't there be a note in the profile not to use this?

nik wrote:

orgonemusic looks to have done a bunch of questionable / wrong edits. Seems to have tried to shift about the Orgone Orgone (2) and Orgone (3) artists. I have put them on the CIP for safety, and anyone check what has happened and see if you agree with me? I feel most if not all of the edits need to be reverted.

8m2stereo wrote:

feel free to add this to No Artist - Discogs Dummy Release,

most probably http://www.discogs.com/label/BMG+Music too ..
i just posed the questions here for some reactions ..

Mr.Mystery wrote:

Need some opinions on this:

http://www.discogs.com/history?release=1184369#latest

jweijde wrote:

Personally I'm not too fond of such profiles.
They prevent people from getting the 'new label' warning.
Plus, many submitters don't check label profiles anyway.

consort wrote:

Approach and edits absolutely wrong, but it's very difficult to wade through all the crap edits to figure out what actually happened there.

8m2stereo wrote:

.. which would only work if they were ever without any subs pending,
also see Sire Records, Mercury Records, None or mcps, among many others ..
i'd prefer placing warnings.

8m2stereo wrote:

def. caused massive havoc, i unf. have no nerve or time for this currently ..
if s.o. has a go at it may leave a short mes. here, so we don't double undo that ..

rassel wrote:

Why is this guy EBJ_Emax
Average Vote Received: Entirely Incorrect (1.50, 2 votes)
still able to resubmit his removed subs?

http://www.discogs.com/submiss...item=release/1724092

marcelrecords wrote:

shouldn't the label in question be emptied first?


Very likely, but I know for a fact that some do. Every avoided release on such labels means less time wasted.

SmotheredHope wrote:

That's a really good question. I put it up for removal again.

jweijde wrote:

Hmm, valid point.

8m2stereo wrote:

next: Decca Records
somehow there should be an automatic warning ping not allowing these kind of anti-labels to be submitted at all, can't be so difficult ..

Mr.Mystery wrote:

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

STILL not in the CIP. How is that possible?

_kerry wrote:

When I see 3 submissions of the same release (in different formats: tape, vinyl, CD) submitted in secession I have my doubts.. looks like internaut does to!

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