Artist (1) is never be used but what about Artist (0) ?

Just came across to this recently listed artist

Various (0)

Wegi
Various (0)

:0

No

Hmmm...methinks something is rotten here.

They are straightforward Various artists compilations. There shouldn't be any number.

RSG §4.3.1.
[...] If none of the existing labels match the label on the release you are submitting, please create a new one by incrementing the appended number (if any), beginning with "(2)". "(1)" is never used. [...]

Missing:"(0)" is never used.

I'm surprised that a submitter actually took the effort to override the suggested "Various (4)", "Various Artists (59)", etc. Most s insist that they're forced to use one of those incorrect suggestions.

He or she is making other errors as well: wrong label, wrong catalog number, etc...

http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/forum/thread/356624?page=1#6954272 Updated guidelines. :)

Obviously, this was an off-by-one error by the submitter... ;-)
Honestly though, I never thought that such a change would be necessary.
Now, what about negative numbers? ;-)

ProgressiveIce
Now, what about negative numbers? ;-)

and LabelName (½) ? :)

Another creative version for Various

http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/artist/4520676-Various

I think a main problem for new s is, that when you type Various in Main artist field, Discogs gives you everything including Various, but not Various to choose.

Dance-Music-Fan
Another creative version for Various

http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/artist/4520676-Vario

and another Various:

seehaas
I think a main problem for new s is, that when you type Various in Main artist field, Discogs gives you everything including Various, but not Various to choose.

Yes I agree wholeheartedly . Something should display to click on for the correct choice rather than nothing.

Madturtle3
Yes I agree wholeheartedly . Something should display to click on for the correct choice rather than nothing.

+1. looks like a big usability fail. Don't propose wrong things when the has entered the correct thing.

Instead of updating the guidelines just add a simple check that the number inside brackets is >1
what you can code to make impossible to do wrong is much better then writing guidelines that can be ignored

seehaas
I think a main problem for new s is, that when you type Various in Main artist field, Discogs gives you everything including Various, but not Various to choose.

Very true,

For some reason it does not appear at the top of the list as some sort of default. Then when you go looking for it then you start to encounter all the other variations.

Perhaps the small information text at the top of the page on for lack of a better term "The Real Various" http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/artist/194-Various could be expanded. Currently in small text "This artist is used as a placeholder entry and does not link to any artist." is all that is visible with an otherwise blank page.

I wonder if some sort of symbol or art work could be placed on this page that would represent "The Real Various" better including some more descriptive text describing the profile for Various. Many of the other pages for the different or improper variations of "Various" display the message "DO NOT USE. Please use Various instead", but nothing appears on "The Real Various page " that might give you more confidence to use that page and stop looking for other versions of "Various" , creating a new one, or just dumping a submission in one that "looks like" it could be the right place.

Suggesting a page that looks more like this, (quickly made with m.s./paint), the text should probably read "Select this Artist profile when...................."
http://oi62.tinypic.com/2iaua1i.jpg

Was there ever a need for this artist profile http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/artist/1125933-Various-4

Maybe I'm missing something but I cant find the "connection to" or "reason why" it says "Only for the project by Heiko Quast! " other than what seems to be possibly? invalid aliases, getting used as another location for "Various".

Was this some how set up as a private page for "Various" at some point in time so their (releases / submissions) would get treated differently.

===========
Not to mention its cousin http://discogs.librosgratis.biz/artist/47156-Various-Artists-4 (most of these ones have been spotted and have requests in to fix)

If I ever got around to producing music I would choose a name unused in the discogs universe and add (2) behind it just cause....

If we're talking about screwing with Discogs...
I would choose a name which was already used by at least two artists, then append "(2)", e.g. "The Band (2)". Would that need to be entered as "The Band (2) (2)"?
And of course, my "special limited numbered deluxe repress of the remastered reissue" releases would appear on a label called "Not On Label" with the cat. no. "No Catalogue Number".

Jajo (00)

It's really amazing how stupid some people are. Do we have to forbid negative and complex numbers next?

Beware!
Various Artists(666)

Have we had Artist (TheReal1) yet?

Jajo (00) was renamed in Jajo (69) ... next free number is (6).
Same with The Professor (69).

ProgressiveIce
It's really amazing how stupid some people are

Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Albert Einstein

DonHergeFan
(69)

That's the Spring effect