- Central PA, USA
- 参加： 2009年11月27日
Beginning in late-November of 2009, I began laboriously and lovingly entering, uploading and updating my vast collection of vinyl to Discogs. As I continued to acquire records on-line and at monthly record shows, as well as at thrift, consignment and used record stores, I often wondered if I would ever get caught up. Finally, on March 25, 2017, I entered ZZ Top - La Grange / Tush, the 8548th record to my collection. Until I acquire more vinyl, I am officially caught up!
I am a member of Keystone Record Collectors, a non-profit organization, dedicated to the promotion and advancement of the hobby of music collecting.
℗ © ™ ℠ ® · € £ $ ¿ ¡ ¼ ¾ ½ µ ³ ² ¢ § ° º × † ♥ ♦ ← ↑ → ↓ ¦ | ± ‒ – № ≠ ٭ ✳ ✶ « » ▷ △ ◁ ∇ ◊ ∆ Λ • ☂ ⁂ ☃ ☼ ☆♪ ♫ ★
m dash —
Ææ Ãã Ââ Āā Ăă Ąą Ää Åå Àà Áá Çç Čč Ćć Ðð Ď Ěě Ĕĕ Êê Ēē Ëë Ęę Èè Éé Ģģ Ìì Íí Îî Ïï Īī Įį Ķķ Ĺĺ Ļļ Łł Ññ Ņņ Ňň Ôô Õõ Øø Ōō Œœ Öö Òò Óó Ŗŗ Řř Şş Šš Ţţ Ûû Üü Űű Ųų Żż Žž Þþ ß ÿ
♦ or ◈ or ★ (Pinckneyville)
MCA Gloversville ⧈-G-⧈
MCA Pinckneyville ◈-P-◈
.OƆ .I.Ƨ.M = MSI Co. (Phila. Pressing Plant) stamped mirror image found under label
Capitol Winchester ─◁
𝓐𝓡𝓟 = Pressed By American Record Pressing Co.
sᴛᴇʀʟɪɴɢ = Mastered At Sterling Sound
SON = Sonic Recording Products, Inc. [Metalwork] see Runt - We Gotta Get You A Woman
And more (thanks CykoMF!)
№ Nº ⁰¹²³⁴⁵⁶⁷⁸⁹ A³ ² ₁ A¹ ₀₁₂₃₄₅₆₇₈₉ ° º ª ½ ⅓ ⅔ ¼ ¾ ⅕ ⅖ ⅗ ⅘ ⅙ ⅚ ⅛ ⅜ ⅝ ⅞
Unicode Strikethrough Text
Copy To Draft.
◾1.2.3. When using a slash between two words, please use a space on either side of it, for example: ABC Song / XYZ Song.
◾13.1.5. Covers should be added only if they are artwork (no scans of plain sleeves please!). For releases enclosed in or including generic artwork, this artwork can be added, but the primary image must be the center label information, or other such image that shows the most non-generic, release specific information. If available, CD / DVD etc booklets and other goodies are acceptable as well. Picture discs, colored vinyl, and other interesting media should be photographed as clearly as possible, preferably without flash.
◾3.4.6. Singles without sleeves should only list the A side as the title, unless it is a double A sided release. However, if they have two separate artists, one each side, please list both track titles in the main title.
◾6.17.1. The 'Reissue' tag should not be used where the work does not appear in it's original form, for example singles that combine two hits together.
◾ 6.16.6. When Not To Use The 'Compilation' Tag: 7" releases combining previously released singles as "double-hit" type releases.
RSG §13.1.4. .... They must be of the exact release they are attached to, please make sure of this by checking the catalog numbers, matrix numbers and other identifiers. Do not add images of releases with different catalog numbers, labels etc.
Linking to a guideline:
[g.#.#.#] for example RSG §1.1.1
Admin's views on images that show the entire record: https://www.discogs.com/forum/thread/360244#3356294
Source for single to format: "Joel Whitburn's Top Pop Singles, 1955-2015".
Other key sources: "Jerry Osborne's Rockin' Records Buyers-Sellers Reference Book and Price Guide, 2015 Edition"
"Looking Ahead: Cash Box Pop Hits 101-150, 1959-1993", Joel Whitburn
Source: Joel Whitburn's Hot Country Songs 1944-2012.
NR means no return. it was used by wholesalers to sell remainders (or cut outs) of records that had been deleted and were now out of print. They would usually sell at a discounted price in a special section in most record stores.
Vinyl vs. Styrene - Paper labels on vinyl are pressed in where styrene are glued on
more info here: https://www.vinylengine.com/turntable_forum/viewtopic.php?t=62462
joshm1979 over 2 years ago
We actually do encourage NAI reports when and where they are truly valid. To be honest, community sales listing reports are something we see as a great boon to the community and staff alike, as long as they are filed properly and with merit, or at the very least, earnest intention (everyone can make a couple of mistakes, that's not really a worry for us).
Sellers have long received notification of sales listing violations and have the ability to view the listing in question, along with guidance to identify the cause, and a prompt to contact staff if they do have concerns. If the seller is unable to identify the issue, they will usually contact us. After we review, we may or may not reach back out to the community member who filed the report for clarification.
Quick primer on how NAI reports work on our end.
When a report is filed, the listing in question moves to Violation status in the seller's inventory, and the seller's account is automatically updated in an admin-only view to show that an NAI has been logged. Total lifetime NAI reports are always available to staff at a glance, and do frequently play a role in reviews of seller privileges. Per above, the listing is then moved to Violation status in the seller's inventory, where staff actually can view the listing in question if need be (it is correct that this was not always the case circa 2013, but a lot of updates have happened since then). Staff have always had the ability to pull a very basic system log entry on the listing violation, but again, quite some time ago, the actual sales listing was sometimes less readily available.
Again, if necessary, we do still sometimes reach out to members who report a listing, most often if 1) the listing has been removed more than once for the same reasons, and 2) the listing itself, combined with the report, does not make abundantly clear why the listing is in violation. In some cases, working with the community member who filed the report helps us learn more about the release in question (if they have a copy / previously owned a copy, we can get information to then pass to the seller about the incorrect listing). Additionally, we may reach out if we suspect the reporter is repeatedly filing violation reports for potentially malicious purposes - a seller reporting a competitor's listing to increase visibility of their own item, a buyer whose offer for the item was rejected, or a contributor whose edit to the release the listing is based on was voted down, and so on.
In the past, we have discussed altering the sales listing reports to better enable the community to coordinate troubleshooting without need for staff intervention - notifying the seller who reported their release and why, for example, as a means of curbing reports just for the sake of removing marketplace competition - but there are no current plans to implement any such significant changes.
We don't track the statistics on listing violations reported vs % of those reports where staff contact community members for follow-up, but I would estimate it to be roughly 1% or less. Furthermore, "removal of reporting ability" is not an entirely accurate phrase - typically, a restricted community member can still file reports, but the listings are not automatically removed. Instead, they are moved into a dedicated reports view, where staff can manually review them prior to confirming removal. Additionally, this is most often a temporary restriction.
As always, I'm not going to discuss any confidential points about any issue that may have led to restrictions for a community member. I can broadly comment that I do recall the case that baytree37 is referring to, and that per the paragraph above, restrictions were temporary.
Hope this helps clarify!