Obviously the same company
I propose to keep Brodard & Taupin as PCN, see the image uploaded (logo in front of the company) on profile.

To me both seem valid, as the logo on Brodard et Taupin shows. Maybe they've just changed the way they credit themselves over the years?

This is possible but i don't think two entries are needed in this case.

I agree they should be merged, they are just name variations.

If they got merged Brodard et Taupin is the one to be kept as it is the older entry and the one with more submissions on it.
And it can't be merged by the system, because NVs are not made automatically.

Agreed, it's just more practical to merge to Brodard et Taupin. The entry can be renamed if needed.

Does these need to be merged as well?
https://www.bookogs.com/credit/469418-brocard-et-taupin (Probably just a misspelling)

I checked yesterday some of the entries, and there also seems to be credits for CPI Brodard & Taupin. Since it was decided to keep the different variations of Clays, this should be kept as a separate entry as well.

On Imprimerie I would vote for name variation too and Brocard is most likely a misspelling, but is a typo of the contributor or credited this way on the item?
CPI took them over (Wikipedia sttes 1998), so the separate entry should stay.

Wikipedia sttes 1998


On both variants ( the "et" and the "&") there are some editions post 1998, when CPI took them over. Unfortunately they are sometimes credited as "Brodard & (et) Taupin Groupe CPI" and sometimes as "CPI Brodard & Taupin", so it is often not obvious how they are actually mentioned in the book.
I've already merged those, which could be clearly assigned through NVs or images.

So if we keep Brodard et Taupin, all books on brodard & Taupin page need to be edited?

So if we keep Brodard et Taupin, all books on brodard & Taupin page need to be edited?


I still vote for keeping both and give them a profile with hyperlinks to the variations.

The problem is that we've merged a lot of similar cases in the past (ampersand/and), so that would not follow other entries.

62 entries isn't that bad if we all help. :-)

but is a typo of the contributor or credited this way on the item?

If I had to guess I'd say it's a contributor typo, but you never know. In this type of cases I just change it to what it should be, and leave a note explaining the situation.

We really need an Alias function like on Discogs.
I went through the entries of the German branch of the CPI group and it was no fun but a manageable amount of variations. The UK branch is going to be worse.

Maybe I misunderstood something...

"Brodard et Taupin" and "Brodard & Taupin" would be name variations
"Brodard et Taupin" and "CPI Brodard et Taupin" would be aliases



I got some notifications, that you've started to merge, but you didn't put an NV on those!?

It's impossinle to know which book has "et" or "&" printed. When the merge will be finish and Brodard et Taupin changed to "&", the anvs can be added later and it can be helped by adding a warning symbol/message to "et" page.

One has to assume that the current entries are correct, so the current credit must be used as NV! Unnecessary double the work. In this way we could have had the system do the merge.

Login or Register to post a reply to this topic.