discogs.com help

john eden

male pale and stale
I've asked on their forum.

Basically there's a correct/incorrect vote for each entry and change. You can't update a new artist's details without someone saying that the entry is correct first.

Apparently you are only allowed to do this after you've been on there a while, but I think I've gone past that point now and I still can't.
 

john eden

male pale and stale
Basically you need to be on there a lot to be able to do a quality vote, which I guess is fair enough.

I can't be arsed personally.
 

john eden

male pale and stale
they don't make it easy for people.

discogs is a bit odd because unlike wikipedia they do actually make money off it (via the % of each sale). So by contributing you are essentially subsidising a company.

Having said that, it is also a useful resource, so whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaatevah
 

nomos

Administrator
word to the wise, submitting bootleg white label ukg records to discogs is a shade more arduous than taking a driving test hungover. but at they're just trying to keep it tidy, unlike the arbitrary pedantry at wiki. perverts.
 

philblackpool

gamelanstep
I can totally identify with the 'driving test' comment....I've got on Discogs properly this year at last to buy & sell some stuff & I've rarely met more annoying people than the so-called 'Voters'. If I do ever become accepted as a Voter (I've so far contributed more than 50 completely new releases to the database, made nearly 370 adjustments etc, been put in a "Contributor Improvement Program" [?!] for a week or two for crimes such as putting dots after track numbers, eventually clawed my way up to a 'Correct' average vote etc etc), then I will be refusing to indulge in the amateur policing the other people involved seem to delight in.

It IS a fantastic site, highly commendable on the whole, but I get the distinct impression they'd rather not know about a record than have even the slightest thing wrong with the listing, which seems wrong to me....the maddest thing is that I'm a librarian & even I'M not pedantic enough in my cataloguing for their liking!
 

joe.dfx

who knows...
yeah i got on that Contributor Improvement Program" too because i was trying to correct incorrect cat# and the guy said i was wrong in doing so. even though i owned the records and he didn't. they never respond to messages either.

a lot of those guys dont even seem to know the rules.

site was a lot better a few years ago before the big update/rule changes.

being able to add digital releases is full on retarded, too if you ask me.

(can this be the discogs moan thread now plz?)
 

nomos

Administrator
(can this be the discogs moan thread now plz?)
i have a good one about how a certain rinse dj twice ordered a record from me (same one both times) and then flaked out before paying - making up dumb excuses, becoming non-responsive, then trying again from a different account. actually that's the whole story. i've wasted a lot of time in the marketplace. :rolleyes:
 

Dusty

Tone deaf
I love the site for everything it contains - but the changes and commercialism of recent years have stopped me bothering to contribute.

Digital releases I can handle, but separate digital releases added for each file format, or even bitrate of mp3? A separate entry for every single variation of a record even if its just a regional difference in the catalogue number? There's being thorough and then there's being OCD.
 

dave

the day today tonight
Digital releases I can handle, but separate digital releases added for each file format, or even bitrate of mp3? A separate entry for every single variation of a record even if its just a regional difference in the catalogue number? There's being thorough and then there's being OCD.
It's good that they can be grouped now, pages like http://www.discogs.com/artist/Beatles,+The are big enough without listing all 48 versions of Sgt Peppers individually, like it did not long ago.

the maddest thing is that I'm a librarian & even I'M not pedantic enough in my cataloguing for their liking!
Bahaha :D
 
Top