I've been working on some of the label pages, and I'm having issue finding info on a few, particularly country of origin for some of the obscure ones. In cases where the country isn't know, would it be acceptable to list them as international, much like we do with bands?

The country of origin is not a required field for labels.

What category would a Bandcamp link belong in? Usually, I put it under Official if it is owned by the band and Official Merchandise if it isn't. The main reason I ask is because I have come across two bands, Annapurna and Collapsian, that have the same link under both headings.

No one ever responded to this one. What's the word?

Should these redundant "Catalog numbers" be deleted or just leave them alone?
http://www.metal-archives.com/search/ad ... re=#albums
http://www.metal-archives.com/search/ad ... re=#albums

If they were mastered as individual tracks, add them to the tracklist. Might seem excessive, but we do want to reflect the actual tracklisting as accurately as possible, after all. There's probably countless counter-examples currently in the database, but that's how I'd do it if I knew the exact make-up of the silent/hidden tracks.


Aaaargh... Delete them.

Only 244 of those? Thought there would be a lot more. Easy points for someone, at least.

EDIT: Easy points for me; done.

Not sure where else to post this but I just stumbled across this band's page http://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Blood_Cult/5608 and it's just weird. The release type and year font is all wonky, it looks like it's in bold. I know full lengths are normally listed that way but I though demos had a different font. Maybe I'm just crazy but it looks odd as hell, at least to me.

It isn't just you. I'll notify the powers that be.

I brought up a case exactly like that a year or two ago (where the truncation of the additional notes left an open HTML tag which applied to the entire page below it) and the admins said it'd be more trouble than it's worth to fix it.

I removed all "<b>" and "</b>" in additional notes, now the page is normal.

Weird, but ok.

http://www.metal-archives.com/albums/Ir ... tate/21320

This album has 1987 as release year. But in the 20th Anniversary Remaster which is from 2008, it says "Originally released: November 8, 1988". However, further down on the same page in the booklet it says "Copyright/Publishing 1987/2008"

So isn't copyright/publishing year the same as release year? If not, it could be a misprint, since it makes more sense that it was released in '88 given that the remaster is referred to as 20th Anniversary Remaster and not 21th Anniversary Remaster.

Hello to everyone,

After a quick search I think that this is the right place to ask some questions about to bands that I want to add to the Archives. First, I want to ask about the Greek band Once Them Edens. I asked in the forum and they told me that this band was banned from the archives because it was not metal enough, at least at the time of their debut album something that I think was a correct choice. However, the second album seems to be a lot heavier so I believe that they deserve a place in this site. I mean there are other bands way less metal than this. Check this song for proof: https://soundcloud.com/once_them_edens/ ... inest-wine

My second question regards the Norwegian avant-garde metal band Manimalism, which is what became of the black metal band Taarenes Vaar. They are releasing a new album this coming November and I wondering f I could add them. We have Ved Buens Ende and Virus so why not Manimalism, who don't seem far off these aforementioned bands.

Thank you very much in advance and I hope I did not post in the wrong forum.

You are looking for this thread, please post there. Manimalism are not blacklisted, so if you think they belong, submit them if/once they have a valid release.

If anyone with sufficient access is looking for some easy points. There are several thousand tracks on the site with the addendum (bonus track) or something to that equivalent entered in the track title field, which must now be removed due to the presence of the checkbox for "bonus" that we recently added.

http://www.metal-archives.com/search?se ... song_title

If this is still actual, I've asked the vocalist of Cerebral Effusion (on today's gig) and he said that he didn't know anything about this band, even heard this name for the first time, so they haven't connection to Cerebral Effusion at least

Is it impossible to edit the name of Side B when it's the same songs on both sides, in which case only one side shows when editing the release?

What do you mean, like giving it a title? I guess not, I ran into this the other day when side B of a vinyl was blank, but was etched. I tried to add 'etched' to the title of the side to denote this but it just doesn't come up.

Yes. On this release, Side B is called "Side Alive", but now it looks like only Side A has a name since that was the only which could be added since it's the same songs on both sides.

http://www.metal-archives.com/albums/Mo ... ing/342547

Easiest solution for the time being is simply to recreate the tracks and add the title as normal. Its been fixed now.

If anyone with sufficient access is looking for some easy points,we can now use the advanced search based on parameters within the description field.

So to start, there are roughly 1,300 entries that need "Jewel Case" or something of that equivalent removed. Then we can move on to "Digipack" and other erroneous entries. Lots of points to be had here...

If anyone with sufficient access is looking for some easy points,we can now use the advanced search based on parameters within the description field.

The last task is done, and many more remain. We need to:

1. Change roughly 900 entries from "Digipack" to "Digipak"

2. Continue to remove "edition" from most description field entries, like changing "Japanese edition" to "Japan" for starters.

3. "Tape edition" "Vinyl edition" (unless the color is specifically designated) etc. etc.

You won't be accused of point whoring; have fun.

If you want a tool to help you open multiple links at once, by the way, check out Snap Links:

Firefox: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefo ... LinksPlus/
Chrome: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/deta ... eegg?hl=en

Best add-on I've ever used and it's perfect for MA.

I suggest you add a place to put Live Tour's and or Special events that don't qualify as a release.

If anyone with sufficient access is looking for some easy points,we can now use the advanced search based on parameters within the description field.

There are ~1400 entries with "black vinyl" in the description field that need fixed. Be sure to watch out for a pressing limitation and replace it with "Limited edition" in these instances, and keep an eye out for separated versions that are actually multiple colors of the same pressing. Those need to be combined.

ujiteruhojo: Not quite sure what you mean. Got an example?

Diamhea: http://imgur.com/1XktDxc Next to the Discography tab at top put a "Live tours" or "Other" tab and make it the same as the discography list except instead of one release date put (ex. June 2005-September 2005), Instead of tracks put dates, and upload a picture if possible.
Make sense?

It has been suggested before, and would be nice, but it isn't really feasible at this time. I discussed this with some other mods at length. It may be nice to have in the future, but maintaining the standard of our level of data accuracy is one of the main concerns.

Where is the correct place to question/pre-check whether adding a CD to the Archives would be Acceptable/Unacceptable? I suppose I could submit an Error Report on the band page, but it isn't really an 'Error' since I'm not reporting something that has already been submitted. This thread itself doesn't appear quite appropriate for that function to me either. Thanks.

(Ya know... I just noticed this, but just because I am new HERE, calling me a Mallcore Kid is REALLY a low blow!)

I guess this is fine...what is it then?

Well first, are you submitting a CD to an already existing band or are you looking to submit a new band? If it's the former, you can usually do it yourself if you have an account, though making a report is perfectly fine too... especially if you're not certain if it's valid or not. If it's the latter, just submit the band and we can review it while it's in the queue.

Second, the "mallcore kid" is a default label given to all users with a low post count on the forums. It's a meaningless title.

Yeah, I have no problem submitting CD's or other versions for existing bands, but I have a feeling this may be considered an Unacceptable release, but I don't think it is COMPLETELY clear, which is why I wish to check.

The band in question is Amon Amarth, and this is the release: http://www.discogs.com/Amon-Amarth-With-Oden-On-Our-Side/release/3872557

Now, I understand that "Promo-only releases sent to labels" are considered Unacceptable. However, I am not sure that this release exactly qualifies as that. It is titled "Radio / Club Promotion". I have this CD, I honestly don't remember exactly how I got it, but I think I got it from the Amon Amarth fan club. The disc itself DOES state "For promotional use only. Not for resale". However, I do think this disc was distributed beyond what I would generally consider a "Promo" or I wouldn't be asking. It DOES have a catalog #. However, I would completely understand if it is still felt that this should be considered Unacceptable.

(and my Mallkid comment was meant as a joke, but I didn't realize I could use smiles here, so sorry if that was lost...)

Well, the rule really stretches to officially encompass "Radio/zine promos" or more lucidly stated "any release that was not publicly released." Of course the line sort of blurs just as it does here, but going by this being a "radio/club promo" sort of guides my hand towards no based on the fact that it was not widely accessible to the greater public. We have no problem adding "Club editions" as other versions of valid parent entries (as I myself have done as well) but as a standalone entry on their discography, the level of scrutiny ratchets up a fair bit. Not only that, one would think this has been glanced over a few times in the past as AA is a fairly high traffic band profile on the site. I added all of the other versions for their page back over the Summer and skipped this then as well. A fair question, and we will take another look at the guidelines concerning promos as we get a fair number of queries regarding them, but for now: No.

Thanks... it actually DID occur to me that it probably would have already been added by someone else, since it isn't that uncommon, but I figured it was worth asking at least.

An issue I have been noticing quite a bit as I have been adding CD's to my collection here is finding "Other Versions" listed in the "Alternate Notes", rather than as "Other Versions". A good particularly good example is: http://www.metal-archives.com/albums/Elysian_Blaze/Beneath_Silent_Faces/45504. This was listed as one release and lists two other versions in the "Alternate Notes". I SUSPECT this may be a carryover from a time when "Other Versions" was not yet an option here, I am assuming (as reflected by the original version of the page). I have added the second of the three versions to the "Other Versions" from my collection. However, this now makes having pictures of TWO of the releases redundant for the original release, and might make an edit of the "Additional Notes" worthwhile.

My main concern with this however is that IF people are still adding "Other Versions" in "Alternate Notes" rather than as "Other Versions", they should be discouraged from doing so, and they should be properly added as "Other Versions".

Well yeah obviously. The other versions feature just went active in late May, and people have been cluttering the additional notes going back to God only knows. I saw another report you flagged complaining about how messy it was...and well yeah it will be until all of the gaps are filled in. Feel free to add other versions by working off of existing additional notes, just be sure to clear the redundant info on each version you add, and flag the parent entry to be cleared (if you can't) once done to avoid redundancies. Most people still forget to do this.

Thanks. I can't clear these things myself yet, having only recently started actively 'working' here, despite having used this site for years as an indispensable reference (the wikipedia of metal, IMO, so I apologize if I ever come across as annoyed in my reports, but I consider this site as a very important resource)... that's a dream that's a long way off, since I'm not really a reviewer.

Hey guys, remember kilerdrail, that Chilean kid whom we all spent a good week or so laughing at two years ago? He went and nuked all his shitty non-metal projects from existence on his artist page. Does this count as vandalism? I know for a fact that at least one of those actually existed in that it had a physical release, so I don't know if the whitewashing he's doing should be allowed.

Well, so long as we can confirm at least one of these instances of removal as whitewashing..


I re-added everything and sent him a critical warning.