CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Re-edit

Open-knowledge reference entry

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionApr 22, 2025
Entity authorityQ7299950 ↗
Source-derived summary

In popular music, a re-edit is an altered version of a recorded song created by repeating, reordering, or removing sections of the original recording - for example, making a chorus repeat several times in a row, or extending the length of a break section. Like remixes, re-edits are especially common in dance music.

See also

Audio editing

References

Broughton, Frank, and Bill Brewster. How to DJ Right: the art and science of playing records (New York: Grove Press, 2003), 234–237, 282.

Editorial summary

“Re-edit” enters the record as open-knowledge reference entry. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Re-edit, Open-knowledge and entry can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA practical starting point whose main value is the path it opens into stronger specialist and primary sources. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2003—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Re-edit, Open-knowledge and entry.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Re-edit” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Re-edit, Open-knowledge and entry provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 22, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q7299950. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2003.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Re-edit”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Re-edit primary sources, Re-edit archive and Re-edit research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Re-edit”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Re-edit” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.