Gatefold in FTF

What is the practical purpose of this rule? (i.e. regarding Vinyl "gatefold should not be entered to the format free text field unless there is a version that is not a gatefold"
Whats the harm?

It's almost impossible to enforce and if commented on it's rarely changed and a NMC isn't realistic as, IMO, there are too many erroneous entries & it's a pain to search the subs release notes to see packaging info.

6.1.6. Unless any release that has the same title and format on the artist or label pages is also released using different packaging (for example a slimline jewel case and a Digipak), package description should not be added to the free text field, but remain in the Release Notes.

I think 'Gatefold' should ONLY be added if there is an IDENTICAL cat# & Country with a solo sleeve present with that cat# & country.
(Waaay back I banged on about reversing the logic of adding that. It is MUCH simpler to put 'Non-Gatefold' to an issue in a raft of Gatefold issues) But heh hum.

Even better if the MR Notes said something like "All vinyl issues in Gatefold sleeves (unless otherwise stated)"

I vacillated on even posting this but it's now become a rule I don't see much point in commenting on anymore.. I just wondered what the logic was.. The topic's been tossed about many time's even in my short discog's life with no change or logic that i saw.

swagski
I think 'Gatefold' should ONLY be added if there is an IDENTICAL cat# & Country with a solo sleeve present with that cat# & country.
(Waaay back I banged on about reversing the logic of adding that. It is MUCH simpler to put 'Non-Gatefold' to an issue in a raft of Gatefold issues) But heh hum.

swagski
It is MUCH simpler to put 'Non-Gatefold' to an issue in a raft of Gatefold issues

+1

"Non" in MR will look strange...
I don't see a big problem, if there is normal sleeve version in existance, add Gatefold to FTF if not, mention in MR notes all vinyl come in Gatefolds. The Cat# and country fields content is irrelevant.

It's not a popular guideline, but it is one.

The problem i experience is determining this .by going thru the submissions to check release notes.

cvalda44
I don't see a big problem,

haiyai2u
going thru the submissions to check release notes

Yep - total PITA. Can't personally say how it makes sense.

it can be PITA sometimes, but usually there's no need to check all those notes. if there are some Gat's and some not in MR, just add the FTF

nm

cvalda44
PITA

Adding "non-gatefold" is about as silly as adding "non-reissue".

Eviltoastman
Adding "non-gatefold" is about as silly as adding "non-reissue".

A poor anology. Not all the issues in an MR would have originally been issued as reissues. It would have to have begun life as a reissue by default. Which it won't have, because it has to be a reissue of something in the MR. An issue also has no property, a reissue does, whilst a Gatefold and Non-gatefold (or whatever term) are both properties the package has
An issue released on vinyl in a gatefold by default simply needs a pointer to describe any vinyl issue NOT in a gatefold. I simply said "Non-gatefold" as an example.

cvalda44
I don't see a big problem, if there is normal sleeve version in existance, add Gatefold to FTF if not, mention in MR notes all vinyl come in Gatefolds. The Cat# and country fields content is irrelevant.

1. When there are 3 issues in an MR, none marked "Gatefold" and you are about to sub your German gatefold (Which you know doesn't need entering as they were all issued in gatefolds like the 3 already there...)...How are you supposed to know there is a Non-gatefold existent in Guatemala? That is not yet entered?
2. And, when it is - that poor subber has to enter "Gatefold" on the other 200 entries that have now accumulated in the MR without gatefold in the FTF?
...or those subbers have to go back and add it?
3. Also, the cat#/country is not irrelevant. If I have a Gatefold German then it can't confuse with a Brazilian non-gatefold. An FTF is not relevant to either. Just a Note needed in both. The location separates the two, thus they are not identical. You only need the FTF if they appear to be identical in an MR. That's the point I was making

All gatefold by default. The French is identical cat# but not in a Gatefold like the other
Whatever It's Called Something (LP, Album) Discs SD456 UK 2011
Whatever It's Called Something (LP, Album) Discs SD456 US 2011
Whatever It's Called Something (LP, Album) Discs SD456 2011
Whatever It's Called Something (LP, Album) Discs SD456 2011
Whatever It's Called Something (LP, Album, NG) Discs SD456 2011

IMHO Adding 'NG' for non-gatefold is easier than correcting the untold others.
I know I'm on a loser though ;)

Packaging tags, please, Father Christmas. No more fighties. No more frownies. No more edit warsies.

Packaging tags.

We are allowed to add all kind of nonsense for cassettes in the FTF, so why such a fuss about gatefold covers? If the release has a gatefold cover, that should be added to the FTF - because that's a packaging characteristic directly derived from the release. IMO, this is just another useless Discogs ivory tower approach, miles away from the real world. The "as-on" ordeal is not enforced here? How silly. It certainly makes the "strictly by the rules without common sense" inquisitors happy though. Anyway, we now even have Numbered, so add it to the drop down and move on.

It's only a guideline, you don't have to follow it ;)

Coincidence_vs_Fate
add it to the drop down

+1

Coincidence_vs_Fate
add it to the drop down

+2

Instead of the wealth of packaging options which was previously discussed, I think simple additions of popular packaging types (Cardboard Sleeve, Jewel Case, J-Card Case, Gatefold Sleeve, Tip-On Sleeve, Digipak) this way what was a confusing discussion about packaging is simplified and a less confusing issue - if your packaging is not on the list, then use the FTF.

haiyai2u
What is the practical purpose of this rule?

None.
It's here just to make things more complicated, because contributing to the database is generally way too easy for an average .
It's also here to test the contributor's willingness to obey authorities and to follow the rules, no matter how stupid the rules are.

+3

aasaxell
add it to the drop down

loukash
None.
It's here just to make things more complicated, because contributing to the database is generally way too easy for an average .
It's also here to test the contributor's willingness to obey authorities and to follow the rules, no matter how stupid the rules are.

Coincidence_vs_Fate
add it to the drop down

+4

+ Digipak, Cardboard Sleeve, etc

ChampionJames
Packaging tags, please, Father Christmas. No more fighties. No more frownies. No more edit warsies.

Packaging tags.

+Yes

aasaxell
Coincidence_vs_Fate
add it to the drop down

+2

Add them both to the dropdown (Then we know subber hasn't forgotten to add Gatefold)

Coincidence_vs_Fate
If the release has a gatefold cover, that should be added to the FTF - because that's a packaging characteristic directly derived from the release.

How many forget get to add the speed, or other stuff that is enlightening, like flagging 'Auto-coupled' to an FTF?

Eviltoastman
Instead of the wealth of packaging options which was previously discussed, I think simple additions of popular packaging types (Cardboard Sleeve, Jewel Case, J-Card Case, Gatefold Sleeve, Tip-On Sleeve, Digipak) this way what was a confusing discussion about packaging is simplified and a less confusing issue - if your packaging is not on the list, then use the FTF.

As the gril said to the man who said he liked girls, "What grils?"
A gatefold isn't a triptych
Nor a poster sleeve
Nor a flyout
and for the standard sleeve there's the flipback too
Whilst I go with the thrust of the majority likely being gatefolds, I think we need a 'common list' of Guide for defining the use of the FTF so that the 1st 3 digits are always commonly displayed (when your issue isn't available in the dropdown)

swagski
I think we need a 'common list' of Guide for defining the use of the FTF

No.
All we need is a dropdown menu for packaging. This has been requested for years, and I can't recall any sound reason why this would be a matter of impossibility. And the repeated and ongoing discussions only prove that this request should be treated with a much higher priority than what it's been so far.
(For the record: packaging formats is one of the three things which our buddies at RYM have got right, since years already.)

loukash
All we need is a dropdown menu for packaging. This has been requested for years, and I can't recall any sound reason why this would be a matter of impossibility. And the repeated and ongoing discussions only prove that this request should be treated with a much higher priority than what it's been so far.

Hear, hear

++11

sebfact
All we need is a dropdown menu for packaging. This has been requested for years, and I can't recall any sound reason why this would be a matter of impossibility.

Is there a request in place (wherever) for this dropdown? thank you

sebfact
All we need is a dropdown menu for packaging. This has been requested for years, and I can't recall any sound reason why this would be a matter of impossibility. And the repeated and ongoing discussions only prove that this request should be treated with a much higher priority than what it's been so far.

Hear, hear

Shall we ask Nik to have a look into this? The more I think about it, the more I favour the idea of having Gatefold as dropdown. It would indeed solve many problems wrt. to cataloguing and the market place. Beforehand, I think we need some more +1s though....

sebfact
Shall we ask Nik to have a look into this? The more I think about it, the more I favour the idea of having Gatefold as dropdown.

It seemed so easy to have bundles and oodles more of delightful extra tags to select from, over the last few years of Discog's innovations.
How come we can't just have the Gatefold tag too?

ChampionJames
Packaging tags.

Yes please. Has been said so many times now, that it has to come through. Like endnig hunger and powerty, - and finding the cure against cancer. All four things same day.

I (((think))) the issue isn't adding the tag, but a whole new format section which would contain this and other packaging tags; don't take my word for it, but afair this is intended to be added eventually.

ChampionJames
Packaging tags, please, Father Christmas. No more fighties. No more frownies. No more edit warsies.

Packaging tags.

+1

Coincidence_vs_Fate
It certainly makes the "strictly by the rules without common sense" inquisitors happy though.

^^Get's my vote for quote of the month!

+1

sebfact
I think we need some more +1s though..

Bump for attracting more votes....

+1 for packaging tags.

+1 to packaging and my weight in white sauce

-1 for a democratic Discogs.

+1 for Packaging Tags and to dispense with having to already have a non-blah-blah in the db in order to use it. Just like if something was only issued with red vinyl that shouldn't have to be only in the Notes either.

Management, Programer folks: Any thoughts or comments?

Filed SR....

Maybe it is possible to get a own drop down-area with tag's for packaging.

And it would be really nice to integrate the wonderful packaging description from the discogs wiki
=> http://wiki.discogs.versitio.com/index.php/Packaging
into the RSG here.

sebfact
Filed SR....

You never know, it might come about, we got SID codes recently.

So you folks want http://wiki.discogs.versitio.com/index.php/Packaging in http://discogs.versitio.com/help/quick-start-guide.html#Format

It has been discussed a lot and asked for. It's kinda one of those 'would be great' type things, but it has never risen to the top of the todo list up till this point. Will still keep it in mind, but for the moment we have to stick to the current system...

Eviltoastman
-1 for a democratic Discogs.

this is basically you itting that your second is named nik…
my suspicions have been confirmed…
;-)

nik, adding "Gatefold Cover" to the Format dropdown would suffice, IMO.
Why did we add Numbered, having a much lesser occurence than gatefold covers?
Come on, nik, add at least that tag to the format drop-down....

Lazy people. It's a relatively short word to type. Nik, you add that to the dropdown, you'll be adding to the world's obesity levels. Fingers will get enormous. Make them type it!

pano9000
this is basically you itting that your second is named nik…
my suspicions have been confirmed…

You write that immediately after he seems warm to your requests? If it was me, you'd be submitting with notepad.exe

Eviltoastman
you'll be adding to the world's obesity levels

Not adding it will be adding to the world's eye sore problems: repetively reading endless sub notes and forum discussions about gatefolds, why or why not they are eligible or not. It would enormously simplify things

Eviltoastman
Lazy people.

Conveniently, I would only need to adjust a handful of my collection :-)

sebfact
Not adding it will be adding to the world's eye sore problems: repetively reading endless sub notes and forum discussions about gatefolds, why or why not they are eligible or not. It would enormously simplify things

You're conflating two issues. Adding Gatefold to the dropdown would not automatically mean that it can be used where the sleeve is gatefold. The rule that gatefold should only be added where releases have gatefold and standard sleeves would still be in force, as with the stereo tag. Nik has yet to touch upon that facet, you'll see from his comment he is speaking specifically about adding it to the drop down menu, it would be another development for the rule to be rescinded too.

;)

Eviltoastman
it would be another development for the rule to be rescinded too.

Good heavens, indeed. I do ask myself though how difficult a task that could be...

Eviltoastman
The rule that gatefold should only be added where releases have gatefold and standard sleeves would still be in force,

But a subber doesn't (or may not) know another version of sleeve opening may exist at a point in time of subbing. 'Gatefold' starts to require retrospective editing once presented with a MR that is rolling out...
If the Gatefold were mandatory, then life becomes simpler.
Even more so if 'NG' for non-gatefold were included as mandatory. We would then KNOW FOR SURE each and every entry - irrespective of the first sub or any MR overview.
An empty field could mean the subber didn't bother to mention either - which is part of the current problem IMHO.

sebfact
Good heavens, indeed. I do ask myself though how difficult a task that could be...

Hello! This is Discogs!

swagski
If the Gatefold were mandatory, then life becomes simpler.

Bingo! I was saying the exact same thing with ChampionJerk back at the Batcave. Gatefold not being allowed in the format and gatefold not being added to the release notes results in too many dupes being added to the database.

Eviltoastman
-1 for a democratic Discogs.

We all anderstood that.

swagski
'Gatefold' starts to require retrospective editing once presented with a MR that is rolling out...

You could say the same about applying other newly introduced tags to releases or styles being added etc. This will always require a certain amount of retrospective work in some way. That being said, packaging tags wouldn't hurt. The end result will be an endless amount of edits anyway.

swagski
If the Gatefold were mandatory, then life becomes simpler.
Even more so if 'NG' Or Non-gatefold were included as mandatory. We would then KNOW FOR SURE each and every entry - irrespective of the first sub or any MR overview

+1

Don't Forget Other 'cover' Options.
Like The Clear Or Die-cut Ones Used For Picturre Disks,

what About Die-Cut Gatefold Colored Vinyl Ltd ed Picturedisk Box Sets?

nik has just wrote to me:

I don't see that being added to the current system (there are no packaging descriptions there at the moment).

So, GC stays out. Interestingly, the world continues to spin....

Try gatefold sleeve not cover, perhaps that will change his mind. And cash. Cold. Hard. Cash.

Eviltoastman
Cold. Hard. Cash

I don't think that Nik accepts change.
Sorry, no offence, but that pun was too irresistible.

You're going to feel the full force of Nik's ban hammer there. Nik!! Nik!!! Sebfact meant it!

CykoMF
what About Die-Cut Gatefold Colored Vinyl Ltd ed Picturedisk Box Sets?

There are already options for Ltd Ed, PD and Boxset, but not coloured - the colours are entered frequently in Free Text.

I prefer colours where they are, there's billions of permutations which get different titles.

CykoMF
What About Die-Cut Gatefold Colored Vinyl Ltd ed Picturedisk Box Sets?

You guys may think I'm kidding, but...
http://www.razorandtie.com/emerson-lake-palmer-limited-edition-vinyl-picture-disc-box-set-to-be-released-in-north-america-on-record-store-day-april-20th/

And these are already in the db...
http://discogs.versitio.com/Iron-Maiden-Live-After-Death/release/4186800
http://discogs.versitio.com/Iron-Maiden-En-Vivo/release/3568082
http://discogs.versitio.com/Amon-Amarth-Surtur-Rising/release/3072217
http://discogs.versitio.com/Amon-Amarth-Versus-The-World/release/2416371
http://discogs.versitio.com/Gwar-Bloody-Pit-Of-Horror/release/2835981

I'm just sayin'...
The FTF could get a little full at some point. Having some standardization for the tags like, say, 'Gatefold', or 'Die-Cut' etc... might not be the worst thing.

Hey. Let's go slow.
1. The majority of vinyl is issued in 2 forms of sleeve.
a) A gatefold sleeve (OR a 'fold-out' of some form)
b) A 'standard' or 'regular' squareish kinda sleeve
(Note I used the word 'Sleeve' not 'Cover')
2. So - Let us CONCENTRATE on vinyl.
c) If we have a dropdown that says "Fold-out' it would cover a number of bases that could be fully described in Release Notes.
It is a 'catch-all' for, example A Gatefold, a Triptych, a Poster sleeve, A Flyout, etc.
d) DON't FORGET - one can still append a subtle 'Die-cut' or 'Flipback' to the FTF. (or whatever)
And add comments into Release Notes, having flagged the situation in the dropdown.
3. If an issue is in a 'regular' or 'standard' sleeve then the vinyl release sub is that 'BY DEFAULT' - but if it is not, then THE DROPDOWN IS MANDATORY. ('Flipback' in FTF is fine on a default, as is 'Die-cut, or whatever)

4. As for Digipaks or jewel cases etc., things are fine in the rich tapestry of life.
It's the VINYL sleeves that are posing major probs.
-------
Edit; Submitters need some simplicity. They may not realize what they hold is not a regular sleeve (for that issue). But 90% understand a fold-out from a regular and should enter it accordingly. They don't have to understand it's not a gatefold, but a triptych or it's a poster sleeve - but at least it is not a standard sleeve.
It should not get too complicated, as we would only be dealing each time with issues in one MR - for which there unlikely to be multifarious sleeves.
Simple rules too -
If it's standard do nothing.
If it opens out in some way PUT 'FOLD-OUT'. - which is mandatory.

nik
It has been discussed a lot and asked for.

nik
but for the moment we have to stick to the current system...

Why? It has been asked for repeatedly, I could list all the threads it has been requested in, but I really don't feel like trolling through the search for forums as it is pretty useless for this kind of thing.

As said over and over, this would make it so much easier for all s. No more do I add it in the FTF or not, looking through all releases in a master release. Why is this not important enough to be added? Seriously, this really is much more of a priority than all the minor changes to the database of late. Is there any good reason why you do not consider this important enough to add this as option?

Discogs has become so complicated for submitting, this would help ease the burden somewhat me thinks.

Amsreddevil
Why?

Because if you add Gatefold as new tag, all other packaging tags will be claimed as well. Give 'em an inch and they will take a mile. Obviously, Management wants to avoid that ATM. But, hey, we've got Numbered.....

sebfact
Because if you add Gatefold as new tag, all other packaging tags will be claimed as well. Give 'em an inch and they will take a mile.

And rightly so.

sebfact
Obviously, Management wants to avoid that ATM

Their lack of insight in this matter – or at least a reasonable explanation thereof – is seriously getting annoying.
But hey, we've got black site header menus now. (Which have broken my custom CSS Kash Theme™ yet again, thankyouverymuch.)

Per my thoughts at http://discogs.versitio.com/help/forums/topic/370938#3445020
OR even the ID (commonly used on many sites) for 'fold out cover', which is 'FOC'
(Which also happens to fit well with our 3-digit display)

There's obviously a flourishing disinterest in a mandatory Gatefold (preferably FOC) for the dropdown.
It seems we must do nothing until someone discovers that, among 40 vinyls in MR, there resides an issue NOT in a gatefold that was made in Transylvania.
All hands to pump to add "Gatefold to the other 39 submissions...(of those who were unaware a non-gatefold [or non FOC] existed)
-------
Suggestion for an RSG
RSG If the issue has a sleeve which deviates from a normal vinyl sleeve containment in any manner, as to be a gatefold, a tri-fold, a triptych, a poster sleeve or flyout of some form, then the format dropdown "FOC" should be used. [FOC = acronym for Fold Out Cover]. If the item is other than a 4-page gatefold - which is the assumed default for FOC, if need be, please also enter any brief pertinent data into Release Notes which may help describe the sleeve package more fully. i.e. Tri-fold sleeve, or Poster Sleeve, Die-cut Gatefold, etc.
Submissions without FOC entered are default standard sleeves

helloooooooooooooo china! how i can with discogs ???

I shall put the "Can we do it?" pot on the boil...

Eviltoastman
swagski
If the Gatefold were mandatory, then life becomes simpler.

Bingo! I was saying the exact same thing with ChampionJerk back at the Batcave. Gatefold not being allowed in the format and gatefold not being added to the release notes results in too many dupes being added to the database.

consort
going thru the submissions to check release notes

Yep - total PITA. Can't personally say how it makes sense.

Amsreddevil
Why is this not important enough to be added? Seriously, this really is much more of a priority than all the minor changes to the database of late. Is there any good reason why you do not consider this important enough to add this as option?

haiyai2u
What is the practical purpose of this rule? (i.e. regarding Vinyl "gatefold should not be entered to the format free text field unless there is a version that is not a gatefold"
Whats the harm?

All I could read there was "Championjerk" and "Batcave". I'm so hilarious!

nik
It has been discussed a lot and asked for. It's kinda one of those 'would be great' type things, but it has never risen to the top of the todo list up till this point. Will still keep it in mind, but for the moment we have to stick to the current system...

Nope, not ALL the packaging. Just something to fix a current and somewhat prolific problem regarding the 'gatefold' scenario.
"Numbered" was good, but better still http://discogs.versitio.com/help/forums/topic/370938#3461210
All we are saying is "Give FOC a chance"
(Puts Lennon on turntable) Altogether now... All we are saying...

For FOC's sake....