It is recommended to read part 1 before reading this article.
I adapted my scripts (changes will be added to the repository soon after some cleanups), ran the scripts, and then verified with the data on Discogs: just 65 releases were using a depósito legal as a catalog number, sometimes in addition to the actual catalog number (so should be easy to fix), sometimes instead of the actual catalog number (harder to fix, especially if there are no pictures, of only tiny pictures on which nothing can be seen).
This is actually fewer than I expected, so I am pleasantly surprised. Now let's see how quickly the Discogs community fixes these entries (and thanks to my friend gerjolp for quickly posting the findings to the forum).
Depósito Legal as catalog number
One thing that I wondered about is: for how many releases did people use a depósito legal identifier as the catalog number? I had seen it a couple of times, and wondered if it was a structural error, or not. After all, it is an easy mistake to make, as many people are not familiar with what these depósito legal numbers actually are, and mistake them for just some number.I adapted my scripts (changes will be added to the repository soon after some cleanups), ran the scripts, and then verified with the data on Discogs: just 65 releases were using a depósito legal as a catalog number, sometimes in addition to the actual catalog number (so should be easy to fix), sometimes instead of the actual catalog number (harder to fix, especially if there are no pictures, of only tiny pictures on which nothing can be seen).
This is actually fewer than I expected, so I am pleasantly surprised. Now let's see how quickly the Discogs community fixes these entries (and thanks to my friend gerjolp for quickly posting the findings to the forum).
Comments
Post a Comment