Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Mapping Discussion
  4. Ranking Criteria

[Proposal] Increase scrutinty for name sourcing

posted
Total Posts
15
triplehaven
12 posts
Joined May 2021
Topic Starter
triplehaven
This issue came to my attention after seeing How to Be a Heartbreaker (Nightcore & Cut Ver.) ranked under Marina's old name Marina and the Diamonds, despite her having not used this name for five years now [x] [x]. even a simple google search of this name would have proven that she doesn't use it anymore.

It's easy to see how this could become problematic in the future, as a lack of researching before approving a map could lead to trans artists being deadnamed, and causes general confusion all around. It should be required to check official sourcing even if the sourcing is from another ranked map.
Drum-Hitnormal
Beatmap Nominator
1,727 posts
Joined March 2011
Drum-Hitnormal
RC already tells people to look at official meta sources, its just human mistake by mapper and BN.

do u want add death penalty for such mistake?
triplehaven
12 posts
Joined May 2021
Topic Starter
triplehaven

Drum-Hitnormal wrote:

RC already tells people to look at official meta sources, its just human mistake by mapper and BN.

do u want add death penalty for such mistake?
It's a human mistake that's repeated over and over again, as there are at least 4 ranked maps under marina's name with the same issue. I think there should be more effort put into researching in the future.
fieryrage
osu! Champion / Elite Nominator II
1,404 posts
Joined November 2013
fieryrage
metadata is generally based off the artist name used when the song was released, i.e. Emerald Sword by Rhapsody of Fire would use just "Rhapsody" since the album it was released on was released under that name

same thing applies to the case you mentioned as an example
triplehaven
12 posts
Joined May 2021
Topic Starter
triplehaven

fieryrage wrote:

metadata is generally based off the artist name used when the song was released, i.e. Emerald Sword by Rhapsody of Fire would use just "Rhapsody" since the album it was released on was released under that name

same thing applies to the case you mentioned as an example
Reasonable people could disagree, since I get why this would make sense, but I don't really like it...
Basensorex
Beatmap Nominator
313 posts
Joined January 2018
Basensorex
it is arguably far more confusing to change artist names for songs they published in the past under different names as it would lead to inconsistencies in metadata across time for the exact same songs as well as confusion for people who associate certain names with certain music (think connecting POWER with "Ye" instead of "Kanye West" or other relevant examples)

if they publish music under new names then that new music should use the new (correct) artist field, but otherwise consistency and being as clear as possible should be prioritized imo
triplehaven
12 posts
Joined May 2021
Topic Starter
triplehaven

Basensorex wrote:

it is arguably far more confusing to change artist names for songs they published in the past under different names as it would lead to inconsistencies in metadata across time for the exact same songs as well as confusion for people who associate certain names with certain music (think connecting POWER with "Ye" instead of "Kanye West" or other relevant examples)

if they publish music under new names then that new music should use the new (correct) artist field, but otherwise consistency and being as clear as possible should be prioritized imo
I feel like the ideal solution here is to just retroactively change artist names, but i also understand that there might not be the infrastructure to do that & things could easily be missed or inconsistent.
Ryu Sei
2,898 posts
Joined October 2013
Ryu Sei
Disagree. Use earliest official metadata at the time the song was released whenever possible. Why use newer metadata that doesn't reflect the state the song was released?
Monoseul
Elite Nominator
73 posts
Joined January 2020
Monoseul
RC already tells everyone to look for official sources to decide the metadata.

Like fiery said earlier, generally the metadata for a song is based off the info it's under in the time of release.

It wouldn't make sense and would be really confusing/conflicting if we retroactively changed artist names from what the song is credited under with no explicit reason to do so. It would be incorrect for the song's metadata at the time.

If the artist you mentioned made it clear somewhere that they will have all of their songs (old ones included) to be credited under their current name you'd likely have an argument for this, but it doesn't look like it is. And it would be dealt with accordingly when someone checks the map, not something to change RC for.

Same with it someone maps their songs under their current name, they will be credited as such in the artist field.

We just work with the info given, it's not out of ill intention or lack of care in searching the metadata
Last edited by Monoseul , edited 1 time in total.
triplehaven
12 posts
Joined May 2021
Topic Starter
triplehaven

Monoseul wrote:

If the artist you mentioned made it clear somewhere that they will have all of their songs (old ones included) to be credited under their current name you'd likely have an argument for this, but it doesn't look like it is. And it would be dealt with accordingly when someone checks the map, not something to change RC for.
This seems like a fair middle ground between what some are proposing here ("it never makes sense to change an artists name") vs ("it could be disrespectful to continue to call someone a name they don't want to be called anymore"). If there's already an exception carved out for the latter, then it seems fine.

also: What fieryrage pointed out about using the earliest form of metadata available for a song isn't explicitly stated anywhere that I could find. That could be something to add to avoid confusion.
wafer
790 posts
Joined December 2016
wafer
It's mentioned in the RC already

"If multiple metadata options are available, priority should be given to the option which is most easily recognisable and traceable back to the original song or source."

This heavily implies to use the metadata that is most heavily tied to the song - which would be the metadata at the time of release
clayton
1,917 posts
Joined November 2013
clayton
agree that current RC seems fine as-is
-Keitaro
1,023 posts
Joined October 2013
-Keitaro
Essentially what monoseul said. There's already an example of this in ranked: this map has the artist field changed, because the artist wants their current name (tiger_x0x) to be used rather than the old one (nyattabox)

Same thing with all YonKaGor songs. From this point onwards all yon's song will have to use YonKaGor instead of JonKaGor, regardless of the time it was uploaded. (except that map--its already ranked under that name, and at the time, they were still under JonKaGor)
Last edited by -Keitaro , edited 1 time in total.
-White
322 posts
Joined February 2020
-White
From a legal/ copyright perspective, which is the point of Metadata, if the artist changes the name of the band, the artist of the song doesn't necessarily change, as those rights may have been signed to a publisher/ etc. So I think this post is well intentioned but not the right way to handle things.
xtrem3x
1,786 posts
Joined July 2009
xtrem3x
If an artist decides to change their alias or pseudonym or whatever they want, they will always have an announcement about it, the fact that their product continues with the previous name means that it can remain that way as long as it exists in a physical format registered with the property. intellectual (copyright)...
It can be Marina's and it can be Marina and the Diamonds, it all depends on when the song came out, that's all.
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 15