Ephemeral wrote:

Was the track created for a particular event or music contest (BOFU, BOFA, A Labour of Love, osu! remix contests)? If so, use the event or contest as the source.

This would be a great addition in my opinion. Maybe it could be specified that the standard abbreviation of the event (if it exists) should be used as source, e.g. "BOFXVII" instead of "THE BMS OF FIGHTERS XVII -VISION THE RETRO FUTURE-", as these can get long and unwieldy sometimes.

hmm, music sharing websites as source seems.. weird.

BMS -> yes, obv, i think it was disallowed for dmca reasons or smth?

album name.. neutral.

Albums being allowed doesn't make sense to me if the field is thought of as where a song COMES from.

YouTube and stuff just makes no sense whatsoever to me since that's not a viable source of the song unless it's like from some official YouTube original or something.

I don't know anything about BMS so no comments there but yeah for the most part I don't get why or how these are reasonable.

Topics 0 and 4 are pretty much fine.

About topics 1-3:

1. Albums shouldn't be on source field, since it can bring ambiguity (there are multiple examples of the same song being part of different albums).
   
2. As pretty much everyone said above, using websites as sources shouldn't be a thing with the exception of official content. We should treat them as we treat osu! with the topic 0 (if they are "official" content it's fine).
   
3. About BMS, i'm not sure, but the fact the term comes after a file format is kinda wierd IMHO. If there are contests coming after the term they should be allowed as valid sources tho.

disagree with using media websites (such as youtube,soundcloud) as a source, that'd look so weird.

agree with using BMS as a source

disagree with using album name as a source for the same reason as what Mordred said

Point three was not an intentional behavioural change. An album is not a source and should never be a source. You can add it back to the wording in a better way if required.

BMS is non-arguable. If you think it shouldn't be a source you need to do more research. It is literally *the primary reason* a source field should exist. It is the only way to define a large collection of songs which are not released or available anywhere else apart from BMS.

Website should, as discussed internally, only be used if that is the sole source of a release, to the point the song/artist is only known for that source. The example I gave was "Newgrounds" because again, that is the *only* source for a lot of music, to the point people know (and search for) said music using that word. I don't mind if this change is reverted or reworded to be more clear.

None of these should be contentious or "requiring more effort" changes - the idea is to open up the source field to be used for more cases where it is correct to put a source that was previously disallowed. But I welcome rewording the rules if required to make things more clear.

Album makes no sense to have in source, please don't let people do this, album is fine in tags. Whilst songs are released as part of an album it kind of goes against the idea of the source field in osu as the source field is used to indicate ties to other media, not to give more description about the song itself. It also prevents cluttering because artists have the need to make long album names every now and then.


The source should also not include things like publishing platforms in my opinion. for example, Youtube should only be an option in cases like this with the Song being used to promote a contest sponsored by Youtube itself but in this case i'd argue it would even be Youtube Shorts.

Site only being allowed when it is a tie-in (same as all the other listed sources) sounds fine.

Album does not need to be discussed further. As I said, it should be a given. If that means it needs to be stated, please add it back. Maybe on a separate line.

still feel like websites like youtube and newgrounds are too vague of websites to be considered sources. linking it in the description would probably be a good alternative of shedding light on those "sources".

Point 0 and 4 reached their consensus that it should be fine. Point 3, as peppy said that it's not intended so not gonna talk about it anymore.

I have a concern for Point 1, though. Using websites like youtube, newgrounds, and similar - gives me the same vibe of using google.com as reference material for the research paperwork, to be honest.

At most, I could agree with Noffy's proposal. If the song is tied to specific cultural phenomena related to such a platform, it would not look that weird in my eye. But if it's just that the song got only uploaded in that only platform and not anywhere else (e.g. meme song by the random guy on the internet) - using that website name looks pretty weird.

Revising the checklist based on the past bit of feedback:

1. Has the track featured prominently on a platform or community with strong cultural links to said place and is the primary way most people will know of the track (such as a career YouTuber releasing their track on YouTube, communities like the BMS sphere, Newgrounds etc)? If so, use the platform as the source. Otherwise, platforms should be avoided as sources.
   
2. Was the track used in (or made for) a specific piece of media in which it is prominently known for? If so, use the title of that media as the source. The track must be an osu! original to use osu! as the source in this way.
   
3. Was the track created for a particular event or music contest (BOFU, BOFA, A Labour of Love, osu! remix contests)? If so, use the event or contest as the source. If the event goes by a commonly identifiable acronym (see above), that acronym plus the year of the event should be used as the source and stylized as appropriate (e.g: BOFU2015).
   
4. If the track does not meet any category here, the source field should be left blank. Albums should not be used in the source field at any point.
   

using the tournament/event name instead of osu! is definitely cool, i like that idea. though i think the clause about acronymizing it should be removed, as other (normal) sources use full non-acronymized names (and i think more people not familiar with a specific tournament would understand the source name if used in full)

Ephemeral wrote:

Revising the checklist based on the past bit of feedback:

1. Has the track featured prominently on a platform or community with strong cultural links to said place and is the primary way most people will know of the track (such as a career YouTuber releasing their track on YouTube, communities like the BMS sphere, Newgrounds etc)? If so, use the platform as the source. Otherwise, platforms should be avoided as sources.
   
2. Was the track used in (or made for) a specific piece of media in which it is prominently known for? If so, use the title of that media as the source. The track must be an osu! original to use osu! as the source in this way.
   
3. Was the track created for a particular event or music contest (BOFU, BOFA, A Labour of Love, osu! remix contests)? If so, use the event or contest as the source. If the event goes by a commonly identifiable acronym (see above), that acronym plus the year of the event should be used as the source and stylized as appropriate (e.g: BOFU2015).
   
4. If the track does not meet any category here, the source field should be left blank. Albums should not be used in the source field at any point.
   

What does "osu! original" original mean? There needs to be more context behind this. Does this mean part of an official contest, featured artist song created only for osu!, or any original content created only for osu!?

If osu! original is going to be a keyword used in the ruling, its definition should be included in the ranking criteria glossary.

Please clarify. Thank you.

Purplegaze wrote:

using the tournament/event name instead of osu! is definitely cool, i like that idea. though i think the clause about acronymizing it should be removed, as other (normal) sources use full non-acronymized names (and i think more people not familiar with a specific tournament would understand the source name if used in full)

I can only speak with respect to BMS contests, but in those cases the abbreviation is actually used way more than the full name, music is tagged with it, etc., especially in the big annual events which are more known. The "full name" in many cases works as a subtitle. If you want to search music from the 2019 BOF event you search for "BOFXV" as that's what all the songs are usually tagged with (on youtube, soundcloud, etc.) instead of what would be the proper full name "THE BMS OF FIGHTERS eXtreme Violence" which no one says because of its length and unwieldiness (and could go in the tags).

My opinion about this

0. Agree with this. When artist used this song for other places, it should not have source as osu!

1. Unless that's youtube poop or something meme, it should not have newgrounds or souldcloud or youtube as source. Although NG musics are like posted on NG and can be used various games in NG
2. I disagree with this. If the song which is on both SDVX and BMS, which source should be used? It might be okay as tag.
3. I little agree with this but if official media source exists and it is tie-up like Gintama musics, we should use media rather than album name.
4. It is right, if osu! releases the song as first then you can use source as osu! .

0 I never really understood so that's cool
1 I'd be fine with if it's like the only source for the song, otherwise as other's have said everything and their grandma's song is on yt
2 sure
3 disagree, would make soruce way too broad, especially since some songs get re-released on multiple albums, compilation albums and whatnot. using those in the source field isn't going to help anyone find out what show, website, or album the song is from because it's not clear what the source actually is in that case

plus what more dread said
4 seems reasonable that if u commission a song to be released for use on here that you'd be allowed to use osu as a source

but again using osu as source isn't going to help u find the song
ure already on freaking osu

0: Seems fine unless they're osu! originals.

1: I don't think this makes sense. I see websites as a place to upload music rather than where the music was sourced.

2: This one I’m neutral about. Like many people above me said, BMS is a file type so it would be weird to use this. At the same time, there has to be a way to source songs made for BMS events. I think putting the event it came from would make sense (EX: BOFU2015, G2R2018) since it was made for that event. It's like putting different IIDX/Pop'n Music games as a source instead of just Beatmania IIDX/Pop'n. Idk, more discussion has to be done since the community is divided on this.

3: Still disallowed

4: Stated this already

peppy wrote:

Point three was not an intentional behavioural change. An album is not a source and should never be a source. You can add it back to the wording in a better way if required.

there's a way to reduce this kind of mistake. it's called "asking for feedbacks before it's applied"

In-depth about point 2.

peppy wrote:

BMS is non-arguable. If you think it shouldn't be a source you need to do more research. It is literally *the primary reason* a source field should exist. It is the only way to define a large collection of songs which are not released or available anywhere else apart from BMS.

Can't say you are the right one here.

BMS is a file format created by Urao Yane in 1998 specifically for the emulator BM98, which is an emulator of the game Beatmania by KONAMI. After the format has been introduced, it becomes a standard file format used for emulators of the same sort that simulates Beatmania, and afterwards Beatmania IIDX, with the BME file format. While BMS is established as a file format for the Beatmania, and the Beatmania IIDX series, there has never been a official distribution platform for such songs using the file format, but they are posted on forums and other links.

Let’s go back to the definition of source. With regards to the metadata page of the osu! wiki, the source refers to the origin of the song. BMS has been defined clearly as a file format, not an origin. Artists don’t create songs because of BMS, they create songs and distribute it using such file format. While it may be the only way to define songs which are not released or available anywhere else apart from BMS, it doesn’t mean that BMS is a distribution platform for the songs, thus should not be used in the source. Very usually, these songs come from community-based platforms as distribution, or events that specifically uses these kind of file formats. In these cases, the event it came from, or the official platform should always be used, rather than BMS. In the case where the official platform the song is released is unclear, the source should be left empty instead.

Let’s say BMS are implemented into the rule as allowable source in the ranking criteria. Should that be derived a file format can be used as a source? Say for example, an artist that uses osu!’s keysound combined with the song to create a map, that the source can be OSU (the file format)? Similarly, a song composed for the .ksh file format with the combined FX effect (made for the SOUND VOLTEX emulator K-SHOOT MANIA and later adapted to multiple emulators like Unnamed SDVX Clone) can use KSH as source? It doesn’t make any sense in the sense that source should be the origin of the song.

You should consider this first before saying that this is non-arguable. May you need to provide the reason why you consider that BMS is an origin of a song that it can be implemented into the source field, and why a file format of the sort is justified as an origin of the song.

———

As for other points,

Point 0 makes sense. If songs are released before osu! licenses it, osu! should not be the source of the song.
Point 1 about the platforms, unless the song is composed specifically aimed for the platform to use, say, YouTube decides that a certain song would be composed as its “theme song”, it should not be used as a source. While the likes of YouTube and Soundcloud are an easy access for artists to release a song, having multiple platforms that releases the song would just confuse as to which source comes first. To prevent ambiguity, using websites as the source should be avoided.
No comment about point 3. Should be very obvious why albums are not sources, as they are not the origin of the song.
Point 4, I agree. If the song is composed specifically for osu!, the source should be osu!, since the song originates from osu!.

just gonna assist a few other points because almost everyone expressed their dislike to the proposed changes in OP (since almost all of them are pretty terrible calls)

eiri- wrote:

- any non-original anime song shouldnt be using the anime as the source

- any rhythm game song not made for the game (ie anything not a sdvx contest song) should not be using the game as the source

By definition, a source should be the original place a song comes from and any sort of remxies, mash-ups or other alteration of an anime song (or also videogame or anything else that is altered in a way it can be clearly distinguished from the original version) should not put the origin of the original song as source. It's by definiton wrong.

It makes perfectly sense applying the second point because we literally do this now with osu!.

Chromate wrote:

my opinion: Always force media of first appearance. If it first appeared in BMS, it should be BMS, if it first appeared in osu, it should be osu!, if it first appeared in Youtube, it should be Youtube, and if it first appeared in an album then it should be that album's name or None, preferrably. Everything else goes similar to what I've listed.

I'd like to doubt the legitimacy of the source field; being an accurate and reliable information source, as it is by regular conditions the only field that can vary and change its source, unless the artist applied changes to their name or song title for weird unknown complicated reasons. As enough has stated that source is so weird to handle and hard to research, if we enforce harder rules, I'd like to see it being retired from usage and move it to tags instead. As it can refer to more things. Needless to say it's a terrible call to refer websites as sources because it clearly says nothing about its origin, nor album would be a good idea to refer as source because while they ARE a source, it can always vary as by definiton: an album is a collection of songs. Also when it comes to video games: we enough cases of songs being provided in multiple installments, such as the Shovel Knight soundtrack. Some songs are included in all released games so I don't see the purpose to apply the first game as source when the entire series use them.

Also I am going on a strike if I see Nico Nico Douga being used as a source ever again.


Instead to propse a fix to an element that has always been flawed since day 1 I'd instead suggest getting rid of from the source field and refer to a tagging system that makes it much easier to search for a song being involved in multiple sources (I think someone referred to it as "-booru taggin"). It would solve the trouble for songs with (too) many appearances, the issue with albums and preferably have the accessibility to adjust this on website, because it's obvious that we cannot edit the .osu files everytime a new source is added to a map but it should be seperated entirely. and is a better solution on long-term than forcing wonky inconsistent and unreliable rules which clearly failed to achieve what they should.

Opened PR at https://github.com/ppy/osu-wiki/pull/6150

Largely based off of ephemeral's bullet points but without the bullet points as well as the general opinion shown throughout the thread. There are some aspects of the change that not everyone will 100% like but it seems like a decent compromise to me.

@Stefan I think a tagging system rehaul would be lovely but seems out of scope atm.

Edit: Merged