That doesn't happen. We decide which ID will survive.

Oh. Erm... question? Why not use the lower ID in all situations?

(If an artist was the 1200th entry in the site's database... and later on, some script kiddie goes and adds a duplicate artist with an ID of 4110124 in future... would artist Nr #1200 be the one to receive the merge?)

We tend to keep the most complete entry.

Who cares if Metallica is entry #200 or #90683?

Alhadis's point is that you're more likely to see a bunch of {200} in various notes than {90683}, but yeah, we decide which to keep, Alhadis.

As a trusted user, the "delete track" button goes over the edge of the line to the right when I edit a split album. Using the latest version of Google Chrome.

Hmm yeah it does that in Chrome. I admit I can't be bothered to tweak this for Chrome just now, since it still works fine.

Anyone else noticed that using the "Select band members(s)" function destroys unsaved changes? At least in the Misc. staff tab of an album lineup.

It's easy to verify:
1. Edit the Misc. staff section
2. Add an artist with the "Add another artist" function
3. Add a second role to the newly added artist
4. Add an artist with the "Select band members(s)" function

The second role disappears as the artist added in step 4 appears in the lineup.

Yeah it does. I should probably put a warning about that, but that's why the "save this tab" button should be used from time to time.

[off-topic whining removed]

I searched for "Am I Evil?" in the song title search, and instead of anything Diamond Head-related:
http://www.metal-archives.com/search?se ... song_title
...That search turns up this single album as a result, even though the song on that album (titled "Evil...I Am") doesn't even have a question mark. Turns out I have to search for "Am I Evil" to turn up the Diamond Head song or any covers of it.

We've just found another bug. Search again without the question mark.

'Ey, I have to ask... since there isn't a role for "Recording", is that the exact same as "Engineering"?

I'm a total audio n00b, so I wouldn't know Jack honkin' crap which is which.

I usually used it that way as the one's recording are usually the sound engineer's doing the mix

I usually write what they write in the booklet, be it "engineering" or "recording". But yeah, Dexter is right, "engineering" covers both recording and mixing more often than not.

Recording is exactly the same as engineering.
I propose that engineering will substitute recording in the future.

Also, is "layout" and "design" going to be added as roles?

Oh... but when you have to refer explicitly to "recording" as a role (e.g., "recorded by Joe X, mixed by Joe Y at Studio Blah-'n'-blah"), wouldn't it make more sense to mention "Recording" as a role itself...?

And while we're on the subject of role additions, how about adding "Didgeridoo" to the instruments list?

Yeah, there may be cases where one guy does the recording and another one does the mixing. I would rather call "engineering" the mixing and/or mastering process if another guy did the recording

Mixing and mastering isn't quite the same.

See, this is precisely why I'm confused.

Here's a small explanation to the differences, since I can't really put it to words myself.

http://musicians.about.com/od/musiciansfaq/f/mixingormaster.htm

And while we're at it...
Basically, a sound engineer is the one handling the recording console, thus making him the one who records. While engineering might cover mixing as well, it's better to use both terms to avoid confusion.

There's a reason that many sound engineers use others to mix and master their recordings. Think about it, does the name Howie Weinberg ring a bell?

Here's another, somewhat queer thing to consider on this matter - engineering is a profession one has to do some hard work and acquire a degree to obtain. Recording/mixing, on the other hand, is something anyone can do these days, with varying degrees of quality. Wouldn't it be just, uhm, weird to lump professionals and amateurs under one banner by labeling them all as engineers?

So we can see that "engineering" can cover a broad range of responsibilities.

If mixing and mastering are on the roles list, then I think "recording" should be too.

Hello, please insert my band named "Leaf Rust" in your website cause it's a really band and i'm sure to say that. we have made a single and you listen here http://www.wakeupcreative.com/rusty_leaves.mp3

Thank you

Rusties: Why don't you submit your own band? It would be easier and the logical thing to do, since it's your band and you have all the info. Just be sure to read the submission rules first.

Use this thread next time: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=64985

Porman, he did submit it, but I rejected the band because the single is southern/psych-tinged melodic rock, not metal.

I'm glad to see an option to add websites for each artist. It's what I (hope not only I) needed - thank you!

^ Nah, I'm grateful for it too. Was actually in the middle of editing artist bios when I suddenly noticed an extra row pop up under the edit box. My immediate response was a vocalised "WICKED!", tinged with an inexplicable British accent.

Besides being able to add links to artists, you can also add extra links to labels. The Trivia tab in artists is also gone. It'll appear under Biography.

Makes for better consistency with label pages. I like it.

Only thing we need now is for Additional Notes to appear above the tabs on Album pages (with a "Read More" link, a.l.a., Artists and Bands). What does everybody else think?

I like it.

I wanted to post this for some time:

@oneidon'tknow: That'd operate quite well under most circumstances, but so far every page on MA has had a branch of tabs below all other related content. Introducing a new design element and having a block of content beneath the tab group could deviate from the interface's consistency.

But eh, that's just my 2 scents.

You're doing it wrong.

As for oneyoudontknow's proposal, I think it's perfectly fine the way it is. No need to further condense things.

I do not want to condense things ... I like to have more information at a time and present them better. I did this release once:
http://www.metal-archives.com/albums/Frostmoon/Tordenkrig/9610
As you can see, the current tab system make it difficult to find the appropriate reference of the asterisks. Now think about guest musicians that have solo appearances, bonus tracks and what not... I simply do not like to click so much. The basic stuff should be accessed on one page, while the reviews can appear in another tab.

You can use scrolls on the side and a small cover.

Yeah, sure, pretend it was intentional.

there is something wrong with this site:
http://www.metal-archives.com/labels/Evil_Spirit/4117
The additional notes are displayed in a strange way; at least here.

Are you seriously bickering over whether something was a a typo or a pun? Sheesh.

The links feature seems stable now, so I'll make a news post about it.

Edit: just saw oneyoudontknow's post... arsedgsdgrf I hate small resolutions. I replaced "related links" with just "links" so that it fits better, but this annoys me. Also, if the label has reports, it'll happen again on smaller resolutions...