I noticed user wevealllefttheden had added Richard Metzer as an NV of Ram Dass on several submissions. IMO this is not an NV but an alias, therefore it required a separate Credit. I created the Credit accordingly and linked the profiles of Ram Dass and Richard Metzer with hyperlinks. I then changed the submissions that used an NV of Richard Metzer to the new Credit.

The user subsequently marked Richard Metzer as a Duplicate citing the ANV guideline rules:

"ANVs should be used for variations in an artist name such as changes to nicknames, language based differences (translations), abbreviations, different initials etc. The existing Artist Name MUST be entered as it currently appears in the database as well, with any variation on the release added as the ANV (the ANV cannot exist on its own)."

I have always understood that ANVs only apply to minor name variations and not to completely different names. A completely different name is an alias and is treated as an individual Credit.

I would appreciate confirmation on this matter as I would hate to think I have got it wrong.

I agree with alias, not anv.

I'm confused. Do you mean Richard Alpert and not Richard Metzer? Richard Alpert (not to be confused with the ageless former slave on Lost) is the birth name of Ram Dass. There's a Ralph Metzner credited in some of the books and it appears that there is some confusion in the credit name changes on the revises. Or maybe I'm missing something when looking over the changes.

Anyway, I think Ram Dass and Richard Alpert should be separate credits instead of ANVs along with the profiles being linked with hyperlinks.

My apologies. You are correct Richard Alpert is the birth name of Ram Dass.

The separate credit I created was for Richard Alpert as an alias of Ram Dass.

Boy, I wish we could edit Forum posts.

Yes not ANV, would need another credit.

I think the biggest problem is that the Bookogs Guidelines do not cover this particular subject.

The Discogs Guidelines state:

2.5.3. ANVs should not be used if the artist uses the name to differentiate their work, in this case an Alias is more appropriate.

2.5.4. ANVs should not be used for any fundamental name changes, such as surname changes. In these cases, an Alias is more appropriate. If in doubt, do not create an ANV.

I will bring this to the attention of the staff as this detail needs to be included in the Bookogs Guidelines to eliminate any confusion. Thanks for the replies.

The Bookogs' guidelines have been modified by the staff, so that they now include the same rule about alias and ANVs.

Yep, sorry for the omission from the guidelines - updated now

Hmmm. I wonder if we could skip the "such as surname changes" part, especially when it comes to maiden/married names.

Never seen the benefit of this:
https://www.discogs.com/artist/3128636-Debby-Kerner-Rettino
https://www.discogs.com/artist/2308396-Debby-Kerner
https://www.discogs.com/artist/1665496-Debby-Rettino

That is an interesting example. How would you manage the three phases of Debby?

TBH, I would just combine them under one entry. I would understand the separation if she had somehow also separated her work based on the different variations, but the credits are all over, and I think it makes viewing her discography complicated.

I agree. I have always considered creating separate credits for maiden names and married names somewhat unnecessary.

The difficulty is assessing if the name separates some aspect of a person's work. Two examples spring to mind: Agatha Christie Mallowan, and Anne O'Brien Rice, both which are used mainly for copyright purposes.

If a name simply changes due to marriage and it does not in anyway separate a person's work, then maybe that is an exemption to be incorporated into the Guidelines.

Two examples spring to mind: Agatha Christie Mallowan, and Anne O'Brien Rice, both which are used mainly for copyright purposes.

Yeah, and at this point I have no desire to merge examples like that. Neither has ever published anything with their married name, so they can stay separate based on 2.5.3.

Let's take a Bookogs example:
https://www.bookogs.com/credit/67945-mary-e-wilkins-freeman
https://www.bookogs.com/credit/116034-mary-e-wilkins

I don't think there's any reason to keep two entries for her, even though one is a maiden name, and one married name.

I agree, it seems pointless in separating the work of Mary E. Wilkins and Mary E. Wilkins Freeman. The trouble is the Guidelines as they stand do not allow for those two to be merged, and I believe there should be an exemption from the alias rule in such cases.

Login or Register to post a reply to this topic.