Labels on the wrong sides of releases.....worth mentioning in release notes?

For example, my Acid Junkies Parts 1 and 2 have the This side labels on That side and vice-versa.
Is it worth adding something to the release notes that some versions of the release have the labels on the wrong sides?

I would say yes, I'd even contemplate using it in the Free Text section as this makes it unique to the one with the labels printed on the correct sides.

Murrolo_again
Is it worth adding something to the release notes that some versions of the release have the labels on the wrong sides?

I would add this as a release of it's own, as a Misprint.

Nothing..

Example:
The Shamen - Move Any Mountain (Pro-Gen) (Misprint edition)

ChrisCrass
I'd even contemplate using it in the Free Text section

please don't, use the Misprint format tag from the dropdown.

NB: A 'correct' version must exist on discogs before we can add a misprint ;)

rassel
I would add this as a release of it's own, as a Misprint.

The labels are attached to the record during the pressing process.
Wouldn't it be a mispress then? The print is correct, it's only pressed on the wrong side.

hermanito
The labels are attached to the record during the pressing process.
Wouldn't it be a mispress then? The print is correct, it's only pressed on the wrong side.

I don't think so:

1. Press the vinyl
2. Print the labels
3. Glue the labels
4. Print the sleeves

A Mispress contains erroneous tracks or the same side pressed twice or or or, so there was an error during the process #1
A Misprint is based on a clean and correctly pressed vinyl or CD, but the printing (labels, sleeve) contain errors, so the error happened in process #2 to #4.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbaueEjXbaU
The labels are "glued" on the vinyl during the pressing ;)
But I agree with you. Misprint, not mispress. You're right.

It's also most likely that when the labels are on the wrong side of a record it happened to, especially nowadays, the whole pressing.
I have a few too. Can't find an example right now. But in the cases I have I had other people confirming it was the same on their copy.

Not worth mentioning. It happens a lot. Should be treated as a one-off pressing error.

Diognes_The_Fox
It happens a lot. Should be treated as a one-off pressing error.

I agree, it may happen "a lot" (maybe less as QC improved)
However, in some instances, for collectors, it may prove "special".
As it is a unique feature, IMHO, it should be sep sub.
Thus enabling it to be found in DB & purchased by any complete-ist / 'fanatic'
Thus, I don't agree..

Diognes_The_Fox
Not worth mentioning.

It's a misprint

hermanito
It's also most likely that when the labels are on the wrong side of a record it happened to, especially nowadays, the whole pressing.
I have a few too. Can't find an example right now. But in the cases I have I had other people confirming it was the same on their copy.

Labels on the wrong sides, apparently the entire pressing run here: M.B.* - M.B. Side E.P.

The incorrect titles have even been adopted as the song title on dj mixes and reissues because of that mis-labeling error, take this compiled/reissue 12inch for example:
Control DC / Maurizio Braccagni - Ritmo Dell' Diavolo / Tribal Techno
^that "Tribal Techno" listed track is actually Megamix Maranza (not yet documented as mis-titled on that back-to-back compiled reissue though.)

It has also actually caused arguments & incorrectly titled youtube videos in the case of that M.B. Side E.P.

EDIT:
b.t.w.: Release Notes if there is no 'corrected' version IMO.
Misprint/Mispress otherwise?? should be Misprint but don't know anymore, people still like to argue, cast votes & edit-war over that issue sometimes, & people have been trying to re-define discogs use of Misprint, I hear things like "Mis-print is only when one of two almost identical pressings has an error in the printed information" in forum posts, which isn't what the agreed usage was when the tag was first introduced.

rassel
1. Press the vinyl
2. Print the labels
3. Glue the labels
4. Print the sleeves

???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDduaWNX2fo#t=3m07s

^here it's:
1. Print the labels.
2. Press the labels into the vinyl (no glue).
3. Print the covers.

Regardless of the process, the agreed usage of Misprint on discogs was for 'errors on the printed material (cover, inserts, center labels, silkscreening, etc...), and ONLY when there is also a 'corrected version of the same pressing'.

Indicates that there is an error in the printed material on the release (labels, CD booklets etc), for example, indicating wrong track listings etc. There must be a corrected version of the release for this tag to be used.

http://www.discogs.sie.com/help/formatslist

djindio
1. Print the labels.
2. Press the labels into the vinyl (no glue).
3. Print the covers.

Yep, that's correct, there's no glue, the center labels are pressed into the vinyl "bisquit" at the same time the record is produced. Interesting.

Diognes_The_Fox
Not worth mentioning. It happens a lot. Should be treated as a one-off pressing error.

That would be the most realistic according to me.
(though I like the idea of being able to find easily such version via the MR)
I have a record which has on one side a "Sacem" label and "Biem" on the other.
I included it to this release :
The Beatles - Let It Be

Diognes_The_Fox
Not worth mentioning. It happens a lot. Should be treated as a one-off pressing error.

I don't know, sometimes the the entire pressing has the labels the wrong way around.

damned if you do, damned if you don't, it seems.

rassel
A Mispress contains erroneous tracks or the same side pressed twice or or or, so there was an error during the process #1
A Misprint is based on a clean and correctly pressed vinyl or CD, but the printing (labels, sleeve) contain errors, so the error happened in process #2 to #4.

Agree, misprint: I shortly had a similar case: http://www.discogs.sie.com/release/136743 (the correct one) and mine: http://www.discogs.sie.com/submissions#item=release/2741927
wrong labels but correct tracks on discs...